ArticleThe Indian journal of medical research2026
Procedures to implement the Supreme Court of India directives to withdraw/withhold life-sustaining medical treatment.
Article in The Indian journal of medical research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Hidden barriers and ground reality in implementing Supreme Court of India directives to withdraw/withhold life-sustaining medical treatment.The Indian journal of medical research · 2026Article
- Authors' response.The Indian journal of medical research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In 2018, the Supreme Court of India legally recognised the rights of patients with terminal illness through the judgement in Common Cause (A Registered Society) v. Union of India and Another, (2018) 5 SCC 1. The processes prescribed to withhold or withdraw artificial life-support medical treatments became practical after the 2023 amendment. The law aimed to ensure the dignified dying of sick individuals whose condition was deemed terminal and irreversible. Healthcare institutions can comply with the Court's guidelines in their entirety only after the concerned State Governments activate specific processes. Karnataka state activated the legal mandates by early 2025. Using an implementation case study, we describe the institutional processes to uphold the ethical and legal mandates when withholding/withdrawing life-support treatment (WH/WD-LST) in a mentally incompetent, terminally ill elderly patient, admitted to a tertiary care hospital in Karnataka. It aims to clarify, (i) validation of 'Advance-Medical-Directive', or the living will; (ii) sequential institutional processes for WH/WD-LST as per ethical and legal mandates; (iii) constitution of the primary, secondary medical boards (PMB, SMB); (iv) reporting formats for PMB, SMB evaluations, and (v) the templates relevant to institutional administrators to convey the mandated details of WH/WD-LST to their jurisdictional judiciary magistrate of first class. The impressions and impact of activating the living will and WH/WD-LST on the family, on patient care, for the professionals, and for the institution are described in brief.
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.