ReviewDie Ophthalmologie2026
[Ethical, legal and care-related aspects of the competence to refrain from diagnostics and treatment : Choosing wisely].
Review in Die Ophthalmologie, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundActing in the patient's best interest is the foundation of medical practice. Because medical interventions constitute bodily injury, they require justification. Actions that do not serve the patient's welfare or that cannot be substantiated on scientific grounds should be omitted.
objectiveHow can a physician consciously and responsibly forgo diagnostic or therapeutic measures in the patient's interest?
methodsEthical, epistemic (i.e., knowledge-oriented and insight-oriented) and legal preconditions for the competence to refrain from diagnostics and treatment are examined as a framework for healthcare provision.
resultsThe competence in medicine to choose wisely comprises the ability to recognize when screening, diagnostic procedures or treatment are no longer medically indicated or when treatment should be terminated and the ability to articulate, both professionally and humanely, why medical action is not the best option in a given case. This decision must be communicated appropriately to the patient, relatives and the interprofessional team. To do so, physicians need the sovereignty to withstand pressure to act (whether stemming from technology, the team, the institution or societal expectations). For making wise decisions in line with a medical virtue, a physician must set aside, among other things, personal economic interests, the fear-driven adaptation to a perceived high-risk liability environment combined with the desire for legal protection, the deeply socialized impulse to always act (actionism) and one's own convenience.
conclusionThe ethically justified, equitable, resource-conscious, legally mandated, patient-centered and responsible contemporary medicine calls for a competence to refrain from action in every physician.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42853391What 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.