Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41405759›Full record

ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2025

A Living Ethics Project to Address Psychological Distress in Chronic Illness: Process and Outcomes.

Bénédicte D'Anjou, Katherine Desjardins, Julie Ianniruberto, Danielle Méthot, Valérie Poulin, Rémi Rabasa-Lhoret, Eric Racine

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

7 authors.

Bénédicte D'AnjouPragmatic Health Ethics Research Unit, Institut de recherches cliniques de Montréal, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Katherine DesjardinsInstitut de recherches cliniques de Montréal, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Julie IannirubertoInstitut de recherches cliniques de Montréal, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Danielle MéthotInstitut de recherches cliniques de Montréal, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Valérie PoulinInstitut de recherches cliniques de Montréal, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Rémi Rabasa-LhoretInstitut de recherches cliniques de Montréal, Université de Montréal, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Eric RacinePragmatic Health Ethics Research Unit, Institut de recherches cliniques de Montréal, Université de Montréal; McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8306-551X

Funding

The development of the project reported and the writing of this manuscript is supported by a grant from the Ministère de l'Économie, de l'Innovation et de l'Énergie of the Government of Quebec, 2022-2024 and a career award from the Fonds de recherche du Québec - Santé (2019-2023).
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionIndividuals living with a complex or rare chronic disease live a life where the use of healthcare services and self-care are part of their quotidian and even of their identity. They may, as a result, experience significant psychological distress. Yet, specialized healthcare providers (HCPs) who manage their care are often ill-equipped to respond to the emotional or social dimensions of their patients' illness and intervene in a meaningful way.

methodsIn this paper, we report on the process and outcomes of a living ethics project, structured as a living lab. The living lab followed a five-phase methodology, each phase involving various research methods (e.g., semi-structured interviews, group interviews) and oriented toward distinct tasks: identifying the issue (phase 1: problem identification), deepening understanding (phase 2: problematization), co-developing interventions (phase 3: ideation), implementing them (phase 4: enactment), and evaluating the interventions and the overall process (phase 5: evaluation).

resultsPhase 1 led to the identification of neglected psychological distress of patients as an important ethical issue. Phase 2 exhibited causes and consequences of psychological distress. Phase 3 led to the co-development of: (1) an electronic medical appointment preparation form for patients, aimed at guiding medical consultations based on their specific needs, facilitating communication, and opening discussions about mental health; (2) a directory of mental health resources intended for clinic staff to better equip them in addressing the mental health of patients; and (3) mental health awareness posters with catchy slogans strategically placed throughout the clinic to raise awareness about mental health and encourage open discussions. Phase 4 led to the implementation of these interventions and phase 5 to their evaluation. All interventions were evaluated positively as well as the participatory nature of the research project while many core aspects of living ethics were furthered.

conclusionThis project shows that directly engaging stakeholders in ethics research, by addressing the moral issues they deem significant and working with them to tackle those issues rather than conducting research on them, can lead to tangible, unexpected, and positive moral and clinical outcomes, even within a short timeframe and with limited resources.

Indexed as

Psychological DistressStress, PsychologicalChronic DiseaseFemaleHealth PersonnelHumansInterviews as TopicMaleQualitative Researchchronic diseasecomplex diseaseliving ethicsliving labpsychological distressrare disease

Identifiers

PMID41405759
PMCPMC12710513

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.