Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41593629›Full record

ArticleBMC medical ethics2026

Balancing perspectives: a critical reflection on autonomy, respect and communication in end-of-life choice-making processes.

Marte Fleur Antonides, Dominique Girard, Yvonne Engels, Els van Wijngaarden

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical ethics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. 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

4 authors.

Marte Fleur AntonidesDepartment of Anesthesiology, Pain and Palliative Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Geert Grooteplein Zuid 10, 6525 GA, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Dominique GirardDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Quebec in Rimouski, Rimouski, Canada.
Yvonne EngelsDepartment of Anesthesiology, Pain and Palliative Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Geert Grooteplein Zuid 10, 6525 GA, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Els van WijngaardenDepartment of Anesthesiology, Pain and Palliative Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Geert Grooteplein Zuid 10, 6525 GA, Nijmegen, the Netherlands. Els.vanWijngaarden@radboudumc.nl.

Funding

Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek VI.Veni.191F.016
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn many Western countries, there is a growing tendency to seek control over death and dying. This leads to a practice in which people anticipate their hypothetical future by a timely explication of their end-of-life choices, such as do-not-resuscitate orders or euthanasia requests. These choices are often presented as individual, autonomous acts, potentially overlooking their relational dimensions. Against this background, this study examined how individual values and understandings of autonomy shape communication around end-of-life choices, and explored whether and how individualistic ideals are articulated, negotiated, or challenged within relational choice-making practices.

methodsA longitudinal, multiperspective, qualitative study was conducted, providing 70 in-depth interviews over two years with community-dwelling older adults (75 + years old) and their close ones. Empirical observations were combined with theoretical insights to investigate how autonomy and communication are enacted in anticipatory end-of-life decision-making and to enrich our conceptual thinking regarding respect for autonomy.

resultsOur findings illustrate that older adults often articulate end-of-life choices as individual decisions, while close ones tend to defer, even when feeling intimately involved or morally responsible. These tensions are intensified when meaningful dialogue is absent or when close ones feel unable to voice their values or concerns, revealing moral frictions between the ideal of individual autonomy and the relational reality of choice-making processes.

conclusionsOur findings highlight the limitations of framing end-of-life choices primarily as autonomous acts. We argue for a shift toward a more fundamentally relational conception, emphasizing interdependence and dialogue over more common notions of independence and non-interference. This approach may better align with the experiences of older adults and their close ones and provide a foundation for end-of-life care practices and policies that acknowledge and respond to the complexity of end-of-life decision-making.

Indexed as

Choice BehaviorCommunicationDecision MakingPersonal AutonomyRespectTerminal CareAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansLongitudinal StudiesMaleQualitative ResearchAdvance care planningEmpirical ethicsEnd-of-life decision-makingRelational autonomy

Identifiers

PMID41593629
PMCPMC12918726

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.