ArticleEuropean journal of pediatrics2025
Mechanical ventilation for young people with Duchenne muscular dystrophy: a factorial survey of the main influences on clinician decision-making.
Article in European journal of pediatrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aims to identify the main factors influencing a clinician's decision to initiate life-sustaining invasive long-term ventilation (I-LTV) for a young person with Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD). We examined the key factors influencing a clinician's decision to support the initiation of I-LTV for children with Duchenne muscular dystrophy using a vignette-based factorial survey. The survey was completed anonymously online (October 2021-January 2022) by Clinicians with experience in working with adolescents for whom I-LTV is being considered. A total of 244 Clinicians completed 510 vignettes. Controlling for other vignette factors, the main drivers of a clinician's decision were the adolescent's own views on initiation, as well as whether the parents agreed with the decision. When participants provided contextual comments, the importance of both the adolescent's and the parents' views was reemphasised. Disagreement between the parent and child about whether to proceed with initiation was indicated as a main strain when considering the clinician's own stance on the decision. Clinicians also identified a need for support to manage situations where there is decisional discord between families, emphasising the importance of triadic shared decision-making and involving the wider multidisciplinary team. Conclusion: These findings underscore the importance of the child's voice in clinicians' decision-making when navigating these challenging bioethical dilemmas. Differing views regarding autonomy and parental involvement can complicate decision-making, pointing to the need for clinical environments that enable self-determination of young people. Furthering our understanding of the factors influencing clinicians' decisions to initiate I-LTV is crucial in ensuring that these decisions are made transparently, with consideration for all those impacted, including the cultural, legal, and contextual factors that may influence decision-making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41114800What 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.