ArticleBMC medical ethics2025
Healthcare professionals' experiences of participating in withdrawing life-sustaining treatment decisions in a Chinese intensive care unit: a qualitative study.
Article in BMC medical ethics, 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.
- "The weight of words": a phenomenological study of Chinese neonatologists' lived experiences of delivering bad news.BMC medical ethics · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe aging population and advancements in medical technology have intensified the emotional complexities faced by physicians and nurses in making decisions regarding life-sustaining treatment (LST).
aimThis study explores healthcare professionals' emotional and cognitive experiences in decisions to withdraw LST for ICU patients, identifies the factors influencing such decisions, and provides evidence-based recommendations to enhance their effective involvement in end-of-life decision-making. By addressing key challenges in this process, the findings aim to offer actionable insights and practical guidance for medical practitioners, policymakers, and healthcare institutions, particularly within the Chinese cultural context, to improve patient-centered care in end-of-life scenarios. A phenomenological qualitative approach was employed, utilizing convenience sampling of ten nurses and ten physicians from a tertiary ICU in China. Participants engaged in face-to-face, semi-structured interviews, which were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using Colaizzi's method to identify and code themes.
findingsHealthcare professionals' experiences in withdrawing LST for ICU patients were classified into three primary themes and eight subthemes: perceptions of LST (professional and humanitarian perspectives); factors influencing decision-making (personal factors of healthcare professionals, family and societal culture, lack of preparedness, and ethical dilemmas); and differing viewpoints of nurses and physicians regarding the execution of LST.
conclusionThe decision to withdraw LST presents multifaceted challenges, including conflicts arising from personal and professional differences among healthcare providers and the emotional complexities intrinsic to the process. Nurses, often constrained by clinical hierarchies and professional limitations, frequently have minimal influence in decision-making teams. Furthermore, communication between healthcare professionals and patients remains insufficient. To enhance the efficacy of decision-making in end-of-life care, improving interdisciplinary collaboration and fostering patient-centered trust are critical.
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.