ArticleJournal of the Medical Association of Thailand = Chotmaihet thangphaet2025
Cultural Adaptation and Acceptability of the Crisis Conversation Guide by Emergency Physicians for Serious Illness Patients: Mixed Methods Study.
Article in Journal of the Medical Association of Thailand = Chotmaihet thangphaet, 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: During a medical crisis, emergency physicians often discuss life-saving interventions with seriously ill patients and their families. Crisis conversations require strong communication skills and a patient-centered approach. Objective: To culturally adapt and assess the acceptability of an existing English crisis conversation guide for use by emergency physicians in Thailand. Materials and Methods: A three-stage mixed-method study was conducted. The initial stage included the translation and cultural adaptation of an English crisis conversation guide to Thai using a modified Delphi method with an expert panel's consensus. The expert panel included four emergency physicians and four palliative care clinicians. The second stage involved surveying Thai emergency physicians on the perceived necessity of each step of the conversation guide using a 5-point Likert scale. In the third stage, the expert panel reviewed the survey results and incorporated feedback to produce the final Thai crisis conversation guide. Results: The Thai crisis conversation guide was initially adapted from the English original via Thai word adaptation and practical rearrangement. In the refinement stage, the expert panel modified several strategies for exploring patient values and added a new step to the conversation guide, which the authors term "gathering the decision makers". The acceptability survey was completed by 180 Thai emergency physicians, with a 36% response rate. These physicians reported that the step with the strongest perceived necessity in the conversation guide was "summarize goal of care" with 176 participants (98%) responding "agree" and "strongly agree". Conclusion: The crisis conversation guide was culturally adapted for clinical practice in Thailand. More than 88% of Thai emergency physicians reported the conversation guide to be acceptable in their clinical practice.
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.