Evidence map›Paper›PMID 8545285›Full record

ReviewPostgraduate medical journal1995

Discussing cardiopulmonary resuscitation with patients and relatives.

K Stewart

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Postgraduate medical journal, 1995. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. CPR or DNR? End-of-life decision making on a family practice teaching ward.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2000
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Advance directives and living wills.Postgraduate medical journal · 1998
    Article
  5. Cardiopulmonary resuscitation.Postgraduate medical journal · 1997
    Article
  6. Discussing CPR with patients and relatives.Postgraduate medical journal · 1996
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

K StewartNewham General Hospital, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper aims to give clear guidance for doctors working in the UK about their responsibilities when discussing cardiopulmonary resuscitation with patients and their relatives. The ethical and legal framework for making decisions is outlined and the commonly encountered dilemmas are discussed.

Indexed as

Cardiopulmonary ResuscitationEthics, MedicalFamilyInformed ConsentMental CompetencyPatient ParticipationResuscitation OrdersAgedAged, 80 and overBeneficenceCommunicationDisclosureDissent and DisputesFemaleGroup ProcessesHumansDeath and Euthanasia

Identifiers

PMID8545285
PMCPMC2398270

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.