ReviewCritical care science2025
Practical approaches to the tasks of preserving autonomy and respecting vulnerability among critically ill adult patients: a narrative review.
Review in Critical care science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Suppression of microbial burden to reduce pneumonia in critical illness: the SMURF feasibility pilot study.Critical care (London, England) · 2026Trial
- Article
- Professional Values, Perceived Ethical Climate, and Dignity-Protecting Behaviors Among Intensive Care Nurses: A Moderation Analysis.Journal of nursing management · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Respect for autonomy and human vulnerability are bioethical principles that are frequently involved in decision-making dilemmas in the context of critical care. Multiple challenges are involved in the tasks of assessing and respecting the autonomy of critically ill patients with respect to the critical illness in question, patients' cognitive status and the context of intensive care units; furthermore, time constraints and emotional stress complicate decision-making for all stakeholders in this context. In addition, critically ill patients are inherently vulnerable to multiple sources of potential unintended harm. Therefore, clinicians working in intensive care units must develop the skills necessary to acknowledge, assess and mitigate those risks. In this manuscript, we review the literature on this topic. We also propose a practical approach that can help overcome some of those challenges; specifically, we advocate for the adoption of a relational approach to autonomy and shared decision-making, which could help overcome those challenges, thereby promoting more effective and ethical patient care.
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.