GuidelineJornal brasileiro de nefrologia
Position statement of the Brazilian Society of Nephrology on the refusal and discontinuation of dialysis.
Guideline in Jornal brasileiro de nefrologia. 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.
- Position Statement of the Brazilian Society of Nephrology on incremental dialysis.Jornal brasileiro de nefrologiaArticle
- Reply to the letter: autonomy and refusal of dialysis: ethical and legal reflections on the Brazilian Society of Nephrology Position Statement.Jornal brasileiro de nefrologiaArticle
- Autonomy and refusal of dialysis: ethical and legal reflections based on the position statement of the Brazilian Society of Nephrology.Jornal brasileiro de nefrologiaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Renal failure is considered a life-limiting CONDITION that often requires Renal Replacement Therapy, such as dialysis or kidney transplantation. Dialysis can effectively relieve symptoms and prolong life, but its withdrawal results in severe complications and death. The decision to discontinue or refuse to dialysis must be made collaboratively by the patient, family, and healthcare team, considering the clinical condition, life expectancy, symptom burden, and individual preferences. This decision, involving clinical, bioethical, and legal aspects, is complex and requires a collective understanding of the process. Withdrawal to dialysis presents a challenge for nephrologists and the healthcare team due to the lack of clear guidelines, which can compromis the safety of the process and the patient's dignity. In this position statement, the Brazilian Society of Nephrology recommends a process for dialysis withdrawal or refusal, including identifying eligible patients, applying prognostic assessment tools, shared decision-making, advance care planning, and offering dialysis alternatives. The decision must be consensual, allowing adequate time for reflection, and healthcare services must provide comprehensive management of physical, psychological, social, and spiritual symptoms, as well as end-of-life care. Proper documentation in medical records is essential to ensure process transparency. Therefore, refusal or withdrawal to dialysis should be an informed decision that respects individual autonomy and balances clinical, bioethical, spiritual, and legal considerations.
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.