ArticleSao Paulo medical journal = Revista paulista de medicina2024
Portuguese Advance Directives-a twist against futility? A cross sectional study.
Article in Sao Paulo medical journal = Revista paulista de medicina, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05090072 (Advanced Directives in Palliative Care), which is not on this 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.
Advanced Directives in Palliative Care: Physician's Role on Caregiver's Empowerment as Patient's Surrogates
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical and Ethical Approaches to Medical Futility in End-of-Life Care: A Scoping Review.Cureus · 2026Review
- Advance care planning in patients with respiratory failure.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAdvance Directive documents allow citizens to choose the treatments they want for end-of-life care without considering therapeutic futility.
objectivesTo analyze patients' and caregivers' answers to Advance Directives and understand their expectations regarding their decisions. DESIGN AND
settingThis study analyzed participants' answers to a previously published trial, conceived to test the document's efficacy as a communication tool.
methodsSixty palliative patients and 60 caregivers (n = 120) registered their preferences in the Advance Directive document and expressed their expectations regarding whether to receive the chosen treatments.
resultsIn the patient and caregiver groups, 30% and 23.3% wanted to receive cardiorespiratory resuscitation; 23.3% and 25% wanted to receive artificial organ support; and 40% and 35% chose to receive artificial feeding and hydration, respectively. The participants ignored the concept of therapeutic futility and expected to receive invasive treatments. The concept of therapeutic futility should be addressed and discussed with both the patients and caregivers. Legal Advanced Directive documents should be made clear to reduce misinterpretations and potential legal conflicts.
conclusionThe authors suggest that all citizens should be clarified regarding the futility concept before filling out the Advance Directives and propose a grammatical change in the document, replacing the phrase "Health Care to Receive / Not to Receive" with the sentence "Health Care to Accept / Refuse" so that patients cannot demand treatments, but instead accept or refuse the proposed therapeutic plans.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT05090072. URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05090072.
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.