ArticleHealth science reports2023
Euthanasia in Africa: A scoping review of empirical evidence.
Article in Health science reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- A comparative cross-sectional study of euthanasia knowledge, attitudes and acceptance among medical students at the University of Ibadan.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Review
- Article
- Nurses' opinions on euthanasia in Spain: an evaluation using a new version of the EAS.BMC nursing · 2024Article
- Euthanasia in Africa: A scoping review of empirical evidence.Health science reports · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: The core ethical perplexity is that physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia (PAS/E) contradicts the core value of medical practice which is about the duty of care to preserve life. While most arguments for and against euthanasia emerge from other continents, no African country legalizes or decriminalizes PAS/E. The essence of this scoping review is to collate evidence and scientific voices on euthanasia in Africa by synthesizing empirical articles on the subject in Africa. Methods: In this scoping review, a systematic search of five electronic research databases-PubMed, SCOPUS, CINHAL Complete, Allied and Complementary Medicine (AMED), and APA PsycInfo-was conducted to identify relevant articles conducted in Africa on euthanasia. After deduplication with the Rayyan software, the retrieved literature were screened for eligibility, and only eligible articles were included in the review. Relevant data from these articles were extracted and analyzed using narrative synthesis. Results: Only 14 articles reporting empirical studies, conducted in Africa, and published in English, were included in the review after a rigorous screening process. The review shows a wide rejection of euthanasia, but there is not much resistance to passive euthanasia, that is, withholding/withdrawing life-saving medical care from a terminally ill patient, mostly due to advanced age of the patient and the incurability of the illness. Many factors, such as religion, profession, and age help in shaping the way an individual view and understand PAS/E. Professionals take the patient's clinical condition and sociocultural context into consideration when making decisions about end-of-life care. The sociocultural context did not favor PAS/E. Conclusion: Euthanasia will continue to be a subject of controversy and debate in Africa and elsewhere. The majority of Africans hold the duty of care and preservation of life as the hallmark of medical practice, which informs the wide rejection of PAS/E.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.