ArticleSpinal cord series and cases2026
End-of-life decisions in acute traumatic cervical spinal cord injury: a case series on caring through a biopsychosocial perspective and an interdisciplinary, shared decision making approach.
Article in Spinal cord series and cases, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionHealth care advancements lead to increased survival after severe cervical spinal cord injury (cSCI). Already in the acute phase, the severity of the injury with its magnitude of expected medical complications and the devastating functional prognosis, can confront the patient and its medical team with pressing medical-ethical dilemmas regarding the (dis)continuation of treatment and/or end-of-life decisions. CASE PRESENTATION: In this case series we discuss four patients with severe cSCI that were admitted to the Maastricht University Medical Center, the Netherlands, in 2024, and in whom questions regarding end-of-life decision arose within a couple of days. While the neurological presentations were very similar, the personal wishes, beliefs and psychosocial situations varied greatly. The process of shared decision making, with multiple meetings with the treatment team, the patients (when possible) and their significant others, lead to the formulation of personalized treatment plans regarding discontinuation of treatment and/or end-of-life decisions. DISCUSSION: This case series shows that end-of-life decisions in patients with cSCI are complex and multifactorial. A biopsychosocial approach is needed to tailor a personalized treatment plan that includes medical, prognostic, personal and external factors. An interdisciplinary team that actively involves the patient and its significant others, facilitates the process of shared decision making, which may also have a beneficial effect on the grieving process for the people left behind.
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.