ArticleBMC medical ethics2026
CARE-ATLANTIC: understanding cross cultural differences in goals of care; a transatlantic study in critical care medicine.
Article in BMC medical ethics, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMedical paternalism, where physicians decide based on perceived patient interests, contrasts with the value of patient autonomy, which emphasizes patients' rights to make informed choices about their medical care. This study explores how trainees from cultures emphasizing these contrasting values interpret limitations on life-sustaining treatments, focusing on potential differences in decision-making.
methodsA survey was designed with two clinical vignettes and trainees rated their agreement or disagreement with 21 different treatment choices on a 5-point Likert scale. Surveys were distributed via Fellowship Program Directors in the U.S. and the ANJMIR in France. Statistical analysis used the Mann-Whitney U test to compare responses across countries and code status groups.
resultsA total of 217 trainees responded. Both American and French critical care trainees made different decisions based on patient code status alone, with the Americans being very polarized in their decisions and the French less so. Significant variations across interventions reflected cultural influences on medical decision-making.
conclusionsThis study reveals significant cultural differences in decision-making between French and American critical care trainees. Americans align more closely with patient preferences, while French trainees show greater variability, highlighting the impact of cultural norms on medical practices and patient care.
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.