Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37358524›Full record

ArticleThe American journal of bioethics : AJOB2024

Affect, Values and Problems Assessing Decision-Making Capacity.

Jennifer Hawkins

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The American journal of bioethics : AJOB, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Finding the balance between respecting autonomy and life-saving anorexia nervosa care: an Australian perspective.Psychiatry, psychology, and law : an interdisciplinary journal of the Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law · 2026
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Jennifer HawkinsDuke University.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The dominant approach to assessing decision-making capacity in medicine focuses on determining the extent to which individuals possess certain core cognitive abilities. Critics have argued that this model delivers the wrong verdict in certain cases where patient values that are the product of mental disorder or disordered affective states undermine decision-making without undermining cognition. I argue for a re-conceptualization of what it is to possess the capacity to make medical treatment decisions. It is, I argue,

Indexed as

Decision MakingMental CompetencyAffectCognitionHumansMental DisordersPersonal AutonomySocial ValuesDecision-makingmedicinephilosophyprofessional-patient relationshippsychiatry/psychology

Identifiers

PMID37358524

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.