ArticleBMJ open2026
Perspectives and experiences of ICU healthcare professionals on conscious ICU patients' involvement in shared decision-making: a qualitative study.
Article in BMJ open, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo explore intensive care unit (ICU) healthcare professionals' perceptions and experiences of shared decision-making with conscious patients.
designA qualitative descriptive study using semistructured interviews.
settingThree ICUs at a Joint Commission International-accredited hospital in Hangzhou, Zhejiang Province, China.
participants16 ICU healthcare professionals (9 females, 7 males; aged 23-45 years) were interviewed between September and November 2024.
resultsWe identified 10 subthemes that were classified into three themes: (a) conscious but not ready: unstable decision-making ability, insufficient emotional readiness and limited cognitive evaluability; (b) the roles of doctors and nurses in shared decision-making (SDM): physicians as advisors, not decision-makers, nurses' limited role in SDM and fragmented team communication hinders information flow and (c) the double-edged sword of patient participation: protection or blame, collaboration or burden, hope or harm and being caught between values.
conclusionsICU healthcare professionals acknowledge the value of involving conscious patients in SDM but also recognise its complexity. Challenges include assessing patients' fluctuating decision-making capacity, poor team communication and the potential for both benefit and harm. These findings highlight the need for clearer professional roles and more structured support.
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.