Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40375287›Full record

ArticleBMC medical ethics2025

Do mental or somatic diagnoses influence emotional response and perception of physician-assisted suicide in Germany? A vignette-based experiment.

Laura Hofmann, Birgit Wagner

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. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Predictors of Support for Euthanasia and Physician-Assisted Suicide (EPAS) Among Older Adults in Israel.European journal of investigation in health, psychology and education · 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

2 authors.

Laura HofmannDepartment of Clinical Psychology, Medical School Berlin, Berlin, Germany. Laura.hofmann@medicalschool-berlin.de.
Birgit WagnerDepartment of Clinical Psychology, Medical School Berlin, Berlin, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPhysician-assisted suicide (PAS) is increasingly being legalized in a growing number of countries and is the focus of societal and ethical debates. However, there is limited knowledge regarding the perception and acceptance of PAS across different physical and mental health conditions. This study aimed to explore emotional responses, understanding, and willingness to support individuals with the wish for PAS.

methodsParticipants from the general German population (N = 512) were presented with four case vignettes of PAS depicting individuals in an online study: one with cancer, one with depression, one with schizophrenia, and one healthy individual. Participants were asked to evaluate the emotional reactions elicited by the desire for PAS, the extent of their understanding of this wish, and their willingness to support each individual.

resultsThe study revealed significant differences in reactions to the case vignettes. Pro-social emotions were lowest and anger highest when considering the healthy individual. Participants demonstrated the greatest understanding and highest willingness to support the individual with cancer, while the least understanding and support were observed for the healthy person.

conclusionsThe differential levels of support for PAS across various conditions underscore the complex interplay between societal values, perceived quality of life, and ethical considerations, particularly when mental health is involved.

Indexed as

EmotionsMental DisordersNeoplasmsSuicide, AssistedAdultAgedDepressionFemaleGermanyHumansMaleMiddle AgedPerceptionQuality of LifeSchizophreniaYoung AdultAssisted suicidePhysician-assisted suicideSuicideSuicide prevention

Identifiers

PMID40375287
PMCPMC12079990

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.