ArticleDeutsche medizinische Wochenschrift (1946)2026
[General practitioner consultation on advance directives - results of a survey of general practitioners in Lower Saxony].
Article in Deutsche medizinische Wochenschrift (1946), 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Although medical consultation is not mandatory when drawing up living wills, it is recommended. General practitioners (GPs) can be suitable contact persons for drawing up and updating advance directive documents. The aim of this study is to record the frequency and type of GP counselling on advance directive documents. It also aims to record the subjective level of competence and knowledge of GPs with regard to counselling on advance directive documents. Method: An online survey was conducted between October and November 2024. The target group was all general practitioners practising in Lower Saxony. An adapted version of a field-tested questionnaire was used, including a case vignette-based knowledge test on advance care planning documents. The data were evaluated using descriptive and inferential statistics. Results: Data from 502 GPs were included. 85.1% of respondents stated that they advise their patients on advance directive documents. Reasons for not counselling patients include a lack of need of patients or a lack of qualification of GPs. The participants rated their subjective counselling competence as rather high. Uncertainties were reported in dealing with patients' emotions and fears. The objective knowledge test showed an average score of 22.5 out of a possible 30 points. A high level of knowledge was particularly evident in relation to the conditions for the effectiveness of living wills. There are knowledge gaps in the area of representation law. Discussion: The majority of GPs surveyed counsel patients on advance directive documents. However, there are clear knowledge gaps and uncertainties that may influence the quality of counselling.
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.