ArticleResuscitation plus2026
Translation and pilot-testing of the ReSPECT (Recommended Summary Plan for Emergency Care and Treatment) form into Danish.
Article in Resuscitation plus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: In the UK, the Recommended Summary Plan for Emergency Care and Treatment (ReSPECT) process and form are used to support shared decision-making and advance care planning, but ReSPECT has not been used in other countries. The aim of this study was to translate the English ReSPECT form into Danish and to pilot-test the Danish form in several healthcare-settings. Method: The ReSPECT form was translated into Danish using a forward and back translation process in line with standard international translation guidelines. The translated form was then pilot tested by patients, relatives and physicians in different health care settings. The participants subsequently completed a questionnaire about its usefulness. Results: 36 patients participated in the conversations; 15 patients, 11 relatives and 13 physicians completed the questionnaire. Most patients and relatives found that the document contained the information they needed, and that it was useful during a conversation about future wishes for treatment and care. Nearly two-thirds of the physicians considered the ReSPECT form to be highly useful for the conversations; and one-third thought it useful for clarifying the patient's healthcare status and recommending treatment. Half of the physicians identified missing or redundant information in the form. Conclusion: The Danish ReSPECT form was considered beneficial for conducting conversations about future treatment and care and clarifying patients' wishes in emergency situations. Further adjustments were identified to adapt the form to the Danish healthcare system. Translating and piloting the ReSPECT process into another languages is feasible and acceptable to patients and providers.
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.