ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Development and Validation of a Case-Based Survey Assessing Ethical Decision-Making in Prehospital Resuscitation.
Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesEthical considerations are central to deciding on resuscitation in a prehospital setting. A systematic study of ethical views can enlighten the area and potentially reveal variations in decision-making. We aimed to explore the ethical views on resuscitation and their impact on the reasoning of prehospital healthcare professionals using a qualitative approach and a structured questionnaire. This study describes the validation of a structured questionnaire designed to explore the ethical views on resuscitation and its impact on the reasoning of prehospital healthcare professionals.
methodsThis observational cross-sectional study used a mixed-methods approach. The questionnaire included qualitative free-text fields and quantitative scales. Its first version was developed based on data from a systematic review and an ethnographic study. Validation involved face-to-face interviews and a two-round Delphi process with experts in qualitative research, philosophy, epidemiology, and prehospital medicine. The final questionnaire was field-tested among Danish prehospital physicians. Exploratory factor analysis assessed underlying relationships, and Cronbach's alpha measured internal consistency.
results216 out of 380 invited Danish prehospital physicians completed the questionnaire. The ethical aspects addressed in the cases included "do-not-attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation," "socioeconomic status," "quality of life," "the patient and family's cultural background," and "relatives' emotional reaction." The questionnaire demonstrated satisfactory internal consistency, with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.71.
conclusionsThe questionnaire was validated as a tool for assessing moral reasoning and variations in perspectives in prehospital decision-making. The survey can be used to assess the moral reasoning and variations therein in prehospital resuscitation decision-making.
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.