Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38152565›Full record

ArticleJournal of aging research2023

Do-Not-ResuscitateDecision-Making during the COVID-19 Pandemic in a Teaching Hospital: Lessons Learned for the Future.

Mick van de Wiel, Sabrina van Ierssel, Walter Verbrugghe, Veerle Mertens, Annelies Janssens

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of aging research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Mick van de WielAntwerp University Hospital (UZA), Department of Thoracic Oncology, Drie Eikenstraat 655, Edegem 2650, Belgium.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0471-7247
Sabrina van IersselAntwerp University Hospital (UZA), Department of General Internal Medicine, Infectious Diseases and Tropical Medicine, Edegem 2650, Belgium.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2955-4130
Walter VerbruggheAntwerp University Hospital (UZA), Department of Intensive Care, Edegem 2650, Belgium.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4557-090X
Veerle MertensAntwerp University Hospital (UZA), Department of Geriatrics, Edegem 2650, Belgium.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2836-2794
Annelies JanssensAntwerp University Hospital (UZA), Department of Thoracic Oncology, Drie Eikenstraat 655, Edegem 2650, Belgium.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1464-163X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Method: A cross-sectional survey study was conducted between February 2021 and April 2021 for all doctors and doctors in training, working in the Antwerp University Hospital during the COVID-19 pandemic. Results: 127 doctors participated in this study. The familiarity with the different scores used in the triage during the COVID-10 pandemic was 51% for the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) and 20% for the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). Participants indicated that their DNR decision is based on various aspects such as clinical assessment, comorbidities, patient's wishes, age, prognosis, and functional state. Conclusion: The familiarity with the different scores used during triage assessments is low. The total clinical picture of the patient is needed to make a considered decision, and this total picture of the patient seems to be well encompassed by frailty measurement (CFS). Although many participants indicated that the different scores do not offer much added value compared to their clinical assessment, it can help guide DNR decisions, especially for doctors in training.

Identifiers

PMID38152565
PMCPMC10752667

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.