ArticleThe oncologist2026
Beyond the binary: a nationwide study of physician decision orientations toward artificial hydration in terminal cancer care.
Article in The oncologist, 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundArtificial hydration (AH) in terminally ill cancer patients remains ethically and clinically controversial. Although evidence suggests limited benefit near the end of life, AH is frequently administered, particularly in East Asian settings where it may carry symbolic meaning. This study conceptualized physician decision-making as a clinical spectrum and examined demographic, clinical, and ethical factors associated with AH decision orientations. MATERIALS AND
methodsA nationwide cross-sectional survey of palliative care-trained physicians in Taiwan assessed clinical practices and ethical domains (autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, justice, cultural, and emotional factors). Scenario-based scores were used to derive continuation, withdrawal, and variability indices. Two-step cluster analysis identified decision-orientation profiles. Group differences were analyzed using ANOVA, chi-square tests, and multinomial logistic regression.
resultsAmong 377 respondents, 4 decision-orientation clusters emerged: contextual/proportional, selective continuation, conservative/continuation-leaning balancing, and consistent withdrawal. Several demographic and professional characteristics differed across clusters. Ethical domains also differed significantly. Multinomial regression showed that cultural and emotional factors were associated with contextual/proportional orientation, whereas beneficence independently predicted selective continuation orientation. Hydration volume and consideration of life expectancy differed across clusters, supporting behavioral distinctions among decision orientations.
conclusionAH decision-making reflects multiple context-sensitive physician orientations shaped by both ethical considerations and professional characteristics, rather than a binary continuation-withdrawal model.
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.