ArticleFrontiers in public health2025
A medico-legal approach to developing a structured decision-making process for patients refusing blood transfusions.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The healthcare providers should respect patients' autonomy in making treatment decisions, which affect their health and wellbeing. Refusing life-saving treatments like blood transfusions raises ethical and legal concerns that should be discussed in informed consent. The dilemma is between respecting patient's autonomy and beneficence principle, the physician's duty of care. This article explores the communication and information process to provide to adult patients who refuse blood transfusions or related blood products, focusing on legal frameworks, clinical practices, and medico-legal risk management. Methods: The authors conducted a retrospective analysis of medico-legal consultations on patients 'refusal of blood and blood components transfusions in the Hospital "Città della Salute e della Scienza" of Turin (Italy) from 2017 to 2021. The Authors divided the consultation process into seven phases and 27 sub-phases which were analyzed through the PROSA risk assessment software. The strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) analysis was used to evaluate the efficacy and potential of this structured protocol of consultation in clinical applications. Results: Based on 16 medico-legal consultations, high-risk sub-phases include medical record analysis, care pathway selection shared by the equipe; alternative therapy identification; communication regarding the transfusion and the Patient Blood Management process; communication regarding the not feasibility without transfusion. SWOT analysis showed that the informed consent process indicated advantages in 74% of aspects versus disadvantages in 26%. Discussion: Healthcare professionals should follow predictable, effective, efficient, transparent, and traceable guidelines when dealing with patients who refuse blood transfusions. A structured communication process, as a part of the informed consent, offers a replicable framework that can be adapted to other clinical contexts where high-stakes decision-making intersects with patient rights, supporting a culture of safety, transparency, and continuous improvement in healthcare delivery, while also helping to mitigate medico-legal risk and potential legal action.
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.