Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42010095›Full record

ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2026

Surrogate Decision-Making in Carceral Healthcare.

Anurima Chattopadhyay, Daniel Karel, David Wendler

Abstract readEditorial
In one paragraph

Article 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.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Anurima ChattopadhyayDepartment of Bioethics, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Daniel KarelDepartment of Bioethics, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
David WendlerDepartment of Bioethics, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. dwendler@nih.gov.ORCID 0000-0002-9359-4439

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The carceral healthcare system is reckoning with a rapidly aging patient population. This is significant because elderly patients are more likely to have medical conditions that render them unable to make their own decisions. Existing laws and ethical guidelines mandate relying on patient-designated and next-of-kin surrogates to make medical decisions for patients who lack decision-making capacity. Yet, providing healthcare to incarcerated patients who lack decisional capacity is especially challenging. As a result, practices vary, and correctional officials, such as wardens or guards, are frequently involved in making medical decisions for incarcerated patients who lack decision-making capacity. The present paper thus considers what qualities make for effective surrogate decision-makers and whether correctional officials tend to possess them. We conclude that correctional officials frequently lack these qualities before exploring other approaches to surrogate decision-making. We identify several approaches with greater potential to ensure that incarcerated individuals' treatment is consistent with their preferences and values.

Indexed as

Decision MakingHealth Services for PrisonersMental CompetencyPrisonersProxyHumanscarceral healthcareconflicts of interestsurrogate decision-making

Identifiers

PMID42010095
PMCPMC13421723

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.