Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41536724›Full record

ReviewHealth and human rights2025

A Narrative Review of Dual Loyalty Conflicts in Custodial Settings and Implications for Community Practice.

Michelle Suh, Marc David Robinson, Holland Kaplan

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Health and human rights, 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

3 authors.

Michelle SuhAssistant professor in the Department of Emergency Medicine at Brown University, Providence, United States.
Marc David RobinsonAssistant professor in the Department of Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States.
Holland KaplanAssistant professor in the Center for Medical Ethics and Health Policy and the Section of General Internal Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dual loyalty dilemmas are conflicts between health care professionals' obligations toward their patients and third-party interests. These conflicts are more common and starker in custodial settings, such as jails and prisons, military detention facilities, immigration detention centers, and involuntary psychiatric institutions. Despite encountering patients in custody, health care professionals (HCPs) in community settings have limited knowledge and training. In this narrative review, we examined dual loyalty conflicts faced by HCPs working in custodial settings and then applied the identified themes to community-based hospitals where HCPs care for patients in custody. We searched databases for original papers relating to patients in custody and dual loyalties and then abstracted key themes, findings, and characteristics of the conflicts. There are five categories of competing loyalties that give rise to dual loyalty conflicts: institutional and organizational entities, legal and regulatory guidelines, ethical and moral responsibilities, social and public responsibilities, and other individuals. Themes include the inappropriate withholding or delaying of care, the provision of intervention despite patient refusal, the violation of patients' rights to privacy, cruel non-clinical interventions (e.g., torture), and the failure to document or report information accurately. Mitigation strategies in the literature emphasize expanding human rights education, improving patient communication around possible conflicts, and raising clinician awareness of institutional policies. Common in the care of patients in custodial settings worldwide, dual loyalty conflicts can impact patient care. However, pursuing mitigation strategies can lessen their impact.

Indexed as

Health PersonnelPersonnel LoyaltyPrisonsEthical DilemmasHumans

Identifiers

PMID41536724
PMCPMC12799046

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.