Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42286398›Full record

ReviewEuropean geriatric medicine2026

End-of-life decision-making in very old critically ill patients.

Sigal Sviri, Isao Nagata, Wojciech Szczeklik, Charles L Sprung

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in European geriatric 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

4 authors.

Sigal SviriDepartment of Medical Intensive Care, Hadassah Medical Center and Faculty of Medicine, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Ein Karem, Israel. sigals@hadassah.org.il.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9213-0245
Isao NagataDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Yokohama City Minato Red Cross Hospital, Yokohama, Japan.
Wojciech SzczeklikCentre for Intensive Care and Perioperative Medicine, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland.
Charles L SprungDepartment of Anesthesiology, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Hadassah Medical Organization and Faculty of Medicine, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

End-of-life decision-making in the intensive care unit (ICU) is ethically complex, particularly for very old patients with limited physiological reserve. Decisions to limit life-sustaining treatment are shaped by medical prognosis, patient values, cultural and socioeconomic contexts, and uncertainty regarding outcomes. Non-beneficial treatment refers to interventions unlikely to provide meaningful benefit while imposing additional burden or suffering, and avoiding such treatment is central to high-quality end-of-life care. Limitation of life-sustaining treatment may involve withholding or withdrawing therapies, which are distinct from euthanasia, and should be accompanied by a transition toward comfort-focused care. Frailty, pre-illness functional status, and illness severity are key determinants of outcomes and treatment decisions in very old ICU patients. Large international studies, including the VIP, VIP2, and COVIP cohorts, demonstrate that frailty is strongly associated with mortality, functional decline, and treatment limitation, while revealing substantial regional variation in end-of-life practices. Prognostication remains imprecise, often leading to prolonged aggressive care despite poor long-term outcomes. Shared decision-making, grounded in transparent communication and alignment with patient goals, is the ethical standard but is frequently undermined by discordance between documented preferences and delivered care. When decision-making capacity is lost, in the majority of countries shared decision-making extends to surrogate decision-makers, who often experience emotional burden and limited accuracy in predicting patient preferences. Ongoing, structured conversations, meticulous documentation, and time-limited trials of intensive therapy can support iterative reassessment of goals of care.

Indexed as

Critical IllnessDecision MakingTerminal CareWithholding TreatmentAged, 80 and overDecision Making, SharedFrail ElderlyHumansIntensive Care UnitsPrognosisEnd-of-lifePalliationShared-decision-makingVery oldWithdrawingWithholding

Identifiers

PMID42286398
PMCPMC13562335

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.