ArticleCureus2026
Ethical Aspects in Clinical Practice: Recommended Summary Plan for Emergency Care and Treatment (ReSPECT) Conversations and Death Certification Processes Among NHS Clinicians.
Article in Cureus, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Recommended Summary Plan for Emergency Care and Treatment (ReSPECT) supports shared decision-making about emergency and end-of-life care, while death verification and certification are essential legal and professional responsibilities for clinicians; however, many clinicians feel underprepared for these tasks.
aimThis study aimed to identify gaps in confidence and training and to contribute to a more thoughtful and compassionate approach in preparing clinicians for some of the most challenging but deeply meaningful parts of their role. Methods: A cross-sectional online questionnaire-based survey was conducted amongst 109 medical doctors in active clinical roles from across the NHS trusts in the UK. A Cronbach's alpha value of 0.84 indicated that the questionnaire is a reliable tool for measuring the intended constructs. The data were analysed using IBM SPSS Statistics Version 30.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, USA). Results: There were 63 (57.8%) international medical graduates (IMGs) and 46 (42.2%) UK graduates. Time constraint (48.6%) and fear of causing distress (42.2%) were the most common challenges faced during ReSPECT discussions. The majority of the participants had not received any formal training in conducting ReSPECT discussions (74.3%) and death certification processes (60.6%). Workshops/seminars (56.0%) were reported to be the most effective type of training/support pertaining to death verification and certificate forms. Conclusion: A large proportion of clinicians did not receive proper training in the domains of ReSPECT and death verification. Therefore, greater emphasis should be placed on providing clinicians with appropriate formal training, clear guidelines and protocol, and ongoing support to help them feel more confident in initiating end-of-life discussions.
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.