ReviewCurrent opinion in critical care2025
Withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies after cardiac arrest.
Review in Current opinion in critical care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Early Physiologic Deterioration versus True Risk Prediction: Methodological Considerations for SALI Nomogram Development.Shock (Augusta, Ga.) · 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
purpose of reviewThis review explores the intricacies of withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy (WLST) after resuscitation from cardiac arrest, focusing on its key motivators and broader implication for knowledge generation. RECENT
findingsWhen approaching WLST, it is important to balance objective prognostic data with ethical principles and cultural norms to ensure delivery of personalized, patient-centered care. Because evidence guiding prognostication after cardiac arrest remains limited, ethical frameworks are not prescriptive, and cultural norms are variable, WLST is inconsistently applied. This contributes to pervasive biases in research and clinical decision making. SUMMARY: WLST following cardiac arrest is a complex decision. Evidence-based approaches to prognostication have notable limitations and are inconsistently utilized by clinicians. We must account for the effect of WLST to avoid perpetuating biased interpretations of outcome data.
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.