Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39863881›Full record

ArticleBMC medical ethics2025

Lay views in Southern France of the acceptability of refusing to provide treatment because of alleged futility.

María Teresa Muñoz Sastre, Paul Clay Sorum, Etienne Mullet

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical ethics, 2025. 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

3 authors.

María Teresa Muñoz SastreDepartment of Health Psychology, University of Toulouse, Toulouse, France.ORCID 0000-0002-1811-7309
Paul Clay SorumDepartments of Internal Medicine and Pediatrics, Albany Medical College, Albany, NY, USA. sorump@amc.edu.ORCID 0000-0003-4009-9343
Etienne MulletEthics and Work Research Unit, Institute of Advanced Studies (EPHE), Paris, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo carry out a detailed study of existing positions in the French public of the acceptability of refusing treatment because of alleged futility, and to try to link these to people's age, gender, and religious practice.

method248 lay participants living in southern France were presented with 16 brief vignettes depicting a cancer patient at the end of life who asks his doctor to administer a new cancer treatment he has heard about. Considering that this treatment is futile in the patient's case, the doctor refuses to prescribe it. The vignettes were composed by systematically varying the level of four factors: likelihood of a positive effect, painfulness to the patient of the treatment, cost of the treatment, and attitude of the family.

resultsFive main positions were identified. For 10%, refusing treatment was almost never acceptable. 35% judged acceptability in line with the level of painfulness. 19% judged acceptability consistent with an interaction between the painfulness of treatment and likelihood of positive effect. For 30% it was either almost always acceptable or always acceptable. 5% did not take a position.

conclusionA range of positions regarding the acceptability of refusing to provide treatment on the basis of perceived futility was observed. These positions have been analyzed in terms of what physicians and medical ethicists would see as the four principles of medical ethics. This description of lay people's positions in terms of the principles of medical ethics present clinicians with a conceptual tool to improve communication and shared decision making.

Indexed as

Medical FutilityNeoplasmsTerminal CareTreatment RefusalAdultAgedDecision MakingFemaleFranceHumansMaleMiddle AgedYoung AdultEnd-of-life careFutilityLay opinionMedical ethics

Identifiers

PMID39863881
PMCPMC11762517

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.