ReviewJournal of general internal medicine2026
For Clinicians Who Write Essays About Patients: Conceptual Review of Consent and Ethical Considerations.
Review in Journal of general internal medicine, 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
Abstract
Clinician-writers are publishing a growing corpus of personal accounts about their healthcare practices in clinical and general readership journals. For many clinician-writers, personal and creative writing offers a means for expressing both the rewards and the costs of clinical work, while providing a means to honor their patients and bear witness to their suffering. Many accounts include private, intimate moments with patients and families. Emerging at a time of consequential economic changes in healthcare systems, the inclusion of humanities, ethics, and the arts-including creative writing in medical journals-has been recognized to increase professional satisfaction and reduce burnout among physicians but also to deepen comprehension of patients' concerns and to increase patients' trust in their doctors. Alongside digital platforms, clinician-written essays occupy growing space in contemporary medical publishing, influencing larger public discussions about health and society. Publishing such writing creates a complex ethical dilemma regarding patient privacy and confidentiality. In this essay, we reflect on the ethical dimensions that arise when a clinician-writer considers publishing a nonfiction account that describes a patient or exposes private aspects of the writer's self. We review the salient published literature and discuss the divergent ethical stances among clinician-writers regarding the choice to publish their writing and issues surrounding consent from patients to publish descriptions of them. An examination of journal policy guidelines reveals a paucity of attention to the particular contributions of reflective, personal, and creative writing. Instead, most journals seem to rely on informed-consent guidelines for clinical trials to guide writers of personal and creative essays in their ethical decisions. Addressing issues of privacy for patients and trustworthiness of clinicians with insights from humanities and creative disciplines can illuminate patients' perspectives and clinicians' creative contributions to effective care. We suggest initial concrete steps toward that aim.
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.