ReviewCanadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie2024
Exercising medical judgement: resuscitation and "Decision-Making for End-of-Life Care," a new policy from the College of Physician and Surgeons of Ontario.
Review in Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Paediatric end-of-life care and cardiopulmonary resuscitation.Paediatrics & child health · 2025Article
- The role of artificial intelligence in life-sustaining treatment decisions: current state and future considerations.Intensive care medicine · 2025Article
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 at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In March 2023, the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO) updated their policy entitled Decision-Making for End-of-Life Care. This policy will significantly change the landscape and clinical practice in Canada's most populous province with respect to decision-making for resuscitation. The update interrupts approximately eight years of CPSO policy that has mandated physicians to perform cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and other resuscitative measures unless they can explicitly obtain consent in the form of a do-not-resuscitate or no-CPR order. The policy is now aligned with the Wawrzyniak v. Livingstone, 2019 court decision which reaffirmed that physicians must only offer treatments that they think are within the standard of care and not offer treatments that are not likely to benefit their patient. In this commentary, we review the historical aspects of the CPSO policy from 2015 to 2023 and discuss how such a policy of a "consent to withhold" paradigm was ethically problematic and likely led to significant harm. We then review the updated CPSO policy, outline some remaining areas of uncertainty and challenges, and make recommendations for how to interpret this policy in clinical practice.
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.