Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39318882›Full record

ArticlePsychiatry, psychology, and law : an interdisciplinary journal of the Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law2024

Decision-making capacity assessments in New Zealand and Australia: a systematised review.

Nicola Mooney, Clare M McCann, Lynette Tippett, Gary Cheung

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychiatry, psychology, and law : an interdisciplinary journal of the Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Age-bias in assessments of medical decision-making capacity: a cross-sectional experimental vignette study.Psychiatry, psychology, and law : an interdisciplinary journal of the Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law · 2025
    Article
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

4 authors.

Nicola MooneySchool of Psychology, Faculty of Science, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Clare M McCannSchool of Psychology, Faculty of Science, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Lynette TippettSchool of Psychology, Faculty of Science, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Gary CheungDepartment of Psychological Medicine, School of Medicine, Faculty of Medical and Health Science, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In an ageing world with a growing prevalence of neurodegenerative disease and recent voluntary assisted dying laws in New Zealand and several Australian states, healthcare professionals are increasingly being relied upon to conduct decision-making capacity (DMC) assessments. There is no legislation in New Zealand or Australia to provide clear guidance on conducting DMC assessments. This systematised review aimed to examine the current processes, issues and debates within DMC assessments as detailed in Australasian literature. Six databases were searched: CINAHL, Scopus, Embase, Medline, PsycINFO and Google Scholar following PRISMA guidelines. A total of 33 articles were included in the review and, following a quality assessment, an inductive approach was used to determine key topics which were synthesised in the review. Five distinct issues were revealed, namely a lack of standardisation and guidelines in approaching DMC assessments, training and knowledge of DMC, professional roles, medical and psychiatric complexities and the medico-legal interface.

Indexed as

capacity assessmentcompetencedecision-making capacitymental capacitysystematised reviewvoluntary assisted dying

Identifiers

PMID39318882
PMCPMC11418049

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.