Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41080997›Full record

ArticleAsian bioethics review2025

Thoughts and Behaviors of Chinese and Japanese Doctors when faced with the Death of a Patient: A Qualitative Descriptive Study of Doctors' Responses to a Hypothetical Scenario.

Hua Xu, Taketoshi Okita, Masao Tabata, Yasuhiro Kadooka, Atsushi Asai

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Asian bioethics review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

5 authors.

Hua XuDepartment of Medical Ethics, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Sendai, Japan.
Taketoshi OkitaDivision of Philosophy and Ethics, Department of Culture and Medicine, School of Medicine, Shiga University of Medical Science, Otsu, Japan.
Masao TabataPatient Safety Management Office, Tohoku University Hospital, Sendai, Japan.
Yasuhiro KadookaDepartment of Bioethics, Faculty of Life Sciences, Kumamoto University Graduate School of Medicine, Kumamoto, Japan.
Atsushi AsaiDepartment of Medical Ethics, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Sendai, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

China and Japan have similar cultures but differing healthcare systems. In both countries, admissions of medical error and apologies by doctors continue to be an important but difficult issue. The present study aimed to examine and compare the thoughts and behaviors of Chinese and Japanese doctors when faced with the unexpected death of a patient. Qualitative descriptive analysis was performed to compare the responses of 20 doctors from each country to a hypothetical scenario involving the death of a patient. We found that almost all doctors in both countries considered the treatment process described in the hypothetical scenario to be inappropriate and most would feel regret when faced with the young patient's death. There was a disagreement concerning responsibility for the patient death among the doctors regardless of their nationality. Doctors decided how to behave facing the patient death after anticipating the bereaved family's reaction and their initial responses varied widely. Japanese doctors indicated that they would communicate with the patient's family after a patient died, whereas none of the Chinese doctors indicated they would do so due to a fear of physical violence from the bereaved family. Finally, the decision on whether to disclose the medical error and apology was made after careful and complex consideration. In conclusion, significant differences were observed between Chinese and Japanese doctors with respect to communicating with, and disclosing errors and apologizing to, the bereaved family. We discuss both the ethical and social implications of these differences.

Indexed as

ApologyChinaCross-cultural comparisonError disclosureJapanQualitative descriptive analysis

Identifiers

PMID41080997
PMCPMC12508314

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.