ArticleAJOB empirical bioethics
'An Unimaginable Challenge': A Cross-Cultural Qualitative Study of Ethics and Decision-Making Around Tracheostomy Ventilation in Patients with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis.
Article in AJOB empirical bioethics. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Experiences and support needs of patients receiving home mechanical ventilation and their caregivers: a qualitative meta-synthesis.Frontiers in public health · 2026Pooled it
- Impact of Built-In Software Monitoring on Survival in Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Patients Receiving Home Mechanical Ventilation: A Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe rate of tracheostomy with invasive ventilation (TIV) for patients with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) varies widely. Previous studies have shown that doctors' values may affect decision-making. There have been no previous international qualitative comparisons of medical decision-making process for TIV or why practice varies.
methodsWe conducted semi-structured in-depth interviews with 16 doctors actively involved in the management of ALS patients from Japan (
resultsOur data reveals similarities but also marked differences in views between the US, the UK and Japan. Almost all participants stated that they ought to respect patient autonomy. However, their approaches varied. British participants wanted to (and felt that they should) respect patient autonomy, but they also believed that TIV was not a realistic option. US participants were likely to prioritize patient autonomy over other ethical principles, and Japanese participants were likely to limit patient autonomy indirectly. The option of TIV appeared to be heavily influenced by the availability of healthcare resources in all three countries. The high cost, limited availability and difficulty of treatment meant that particularly in the UK and the US, it is challenging to receive TIV even if patients wanted this.
conclusionsOur study illustrates how the emphasis on autonomy varies along with variations in the way care is organized in the setting of highly resource intensive treatment and progressive severe disabling illness. There is a need to review elements of the decision-making process in all three countries. This includes the need for transparent, ideally centralized, decision-making guidelines about the provision of TIV. Although we investigated a rare neuromuscular disease, our results will be relevant to other diseases requiring highly resource-intensive treatment toward the end of life.
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.