Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 613

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Withholding and Withdrawal of Life Support from the Critically Ill

Open access
Smedira, Nicholas G., Evans, Bradley H., Grais, Linda S., Cohen, Neal H., Lo, Bernard, Cooke, Molly, Schecter, William P., Fink, Carol, Epstein-Jaffe, Eve, May, Christine, Luce, John M.·1990·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

We investigated decisions to withhold or withdraw life support from patients in the medical-surgical intensive care units at the Moffitt-Long Hospital of the University of California and San Francisco General Hospital, from July 1987 through June 1988. Among 1719 patients admitted to the two intensive care units, life support was withheld from 22 (1 percent) and withdrawn from 93 (5 percent). The reason for limiting care was poor prognosis. Of these 115 patients (18 of whom were considered brain-dead), 89 died in the intensive care unit (accounting for 45 percent of all deaths there), and all but 1 of the remaining patients died after transfer from the intensive care unit. Thirteen (11 percent) had earlier expressed the wish that their terminal care be limited, but this affected care in only four cases. Only 5 of the 115 patients made the actual decision to limit care; the others were incompetent at the time. Of the latter, 102 had families who participated in the decision; family members of the other 8 incompetent patients could not be found, and the decisions were made by physicians. Only 10 families initially disagreed with the recommendations to limit care, and they later agreed. The median duration of intensive care among the patients from whom life support was withheld or withdrawn was eight days at Moffitt-Long Hospital and four days at San Francisco General, as compared with medians of three and one days, respectively, for other patients who died in the intensive care units. We conclude that although life-sustaining care is withheld or withdrawn relatively infrequently from patients in the intensive care unit, such decisions precipitate about half of all deaths in the intensive care units of the hospitals we studied. In most of these cases the patients are incompetent, but physicians and families usually agree to limit care.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejm199002013220506

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 613

Metadata

Authors
Smedira, N. G., Evans, B. H., Grais, L. S., Cohen, N. H., Lo, B., Cooke, M., Schecter, W. P., Fink, C., Epstein-Jaffe, E., May, C., & Luce, J. M.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
1990-02
Volume
322
Issue
5
Pages
309-315
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2317498994
Cited by
613
References
0
FWCI
30.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Withholding and Withdrawal of Life Support from the Critically Ill. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejm199002013220506
The paper
Smedira, N. G., Evans, B. H., Grais, L. S., Cohen, N. H., Lo, B., Cooke, M., Schecter, W. P., Fink, C., Epstein-Jaffe, E., May, C., & Luce, J. M. (1990). Withholding and Withdrawal of Life Support from the Critically Ill. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm199002013220506

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.