The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Families looking back: One year after discussion of withdrawal or withholding of life-sustaining support
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To identify critical psychosocial supports and areas of conflict for families of intensive care unit (ICU) patients during decisions to withdraw or withhold life-sustaining treatment. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. SETTING: Six intensive care units in a tertiary care academic medical center. PARTICIPANTS: Forty-eight family members, one per case, of patients previously hospitalized in the ICU who had been considered for withdrawal or withholding of life-sustaining treatment. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Two raters coded transcripts of audiotaped interviews with family members about their experiences in the ICU and the decision-making process for withdrawing or withholding life-sustaining treatment. Codes identified sources of conflict and personal, institutional, and staff supports on which families relied during the decision-making process. Forty-six percent of respondents perceived conflict during their family member's ICU stay; the vast majority of conflicts were between themselves and the medical staff and involved communication or perceived unprofessional behavior (such as disregarding the primary caregiver in treatment discussions). Sixty-three percent of family members previously had spoken with the patient about his or her end-of-life treatment preferences, which helped to lessen the burden of the treatment decision. Forty-eight percent of family members reported the reassuring presence of clergy, and 27% commented on the need for improved physical space to have family discussion and conferences with physicians. Forty-eight percent of family members singled out their attending physician as the preferred source of information and reassurance. CONCLUSIONS: Many families perceived conflict during end-of-life treatment discussions in the ICU. Conflicts centered on communication and behavior of staff. Families identified pastoral care and prior discussion of treatment preferences as sources of psychosocial support during these discussions. Families sought comfort in the identification and contact of a "doctor-in-charge." ICU policies such as family conference rooms and lenient visitation accommodate families during end-of-life decision-making.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Cites
Increasing incidence of withholding and withdrawal of life support from the critically ill.
Prendergast, T. J., & Luce, J. M. (1997) · American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1164/ajrccm.155.1.9001282 · Cited by 730
Withholding and Withdrawal of Life Support from the Critically Ill
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., et al. (1990) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199002013220506 · Cited by 613
Opening the Black Box: How Do Physicians Communicate about Advance Directives?
Tulsky, J. A., Fischer, G. S., Rose, M. R., & Arnold, R. M. (1998) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-129-6-199809150-00003 · Cited by 323
Self-citationMeasuring the ability to meet family needs in an intensive care unit
Johnson, D., Wilson, M., Cavanaugh, B., Bryden, C., Gudmundson, D., & Moodley, O. (1998) · Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1097/00003246-199802000-00023 · Cited by 232
Effectiveness of a structured communication program for family members of patients in an ICU
Medland, J., & Ferrans, C. E. (1998) · American Journal of Critical Care · doi:10.4037/ajcc1998.7.1.24 · Cited by 97
Needs of families of critically ill patients: a literature review
Kleinpell, R. M. (1991) · Critical Care Nurse · doi:10.4037/ccn1991.11.8.34 · Cited by 13
Cited by
Needham, D. M., Davidson, J., Cohen, H., Hopkins, R. O., Weinert, C., Wunsch, H., Zawistowski, C., Bemis-Dougherty, A., Berney, S. C., Bienvenu, O. J., et al. (2012) · Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1097/ccm.0b013e318232da75 · Cited by 2,639
Guidelines for Family-Centered Care in the Neonatal, Pediatric, and Adult ICU
Davidson, J. E., Aslakson, R. A., Long, A. C., Puntillo, K. A., Kross, E. K., Hart, J., Cox, C. E., Wunsch, H., Wickline, M. A., Nunnally, M. E., et al. (2017) · Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1097/ccm.0000000000002169 · Cited by 1,540
Risk of post-traumatic stress symptoms in family members of intensive care unit patients
Azoulay, E., Pochard, F., Kentish-Barnes, N., Chevret, S., Aboab, J., Adrie, C., Annane, D., Bleichner, G., Bollaert, P. E., Darmon, M., et al. (2005) · American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1164/rccm.200409-1295oc · Cited by 1,332
A communication strategy and brochure for relatives of patients dying in the ICU.
Lautrette, A., Darmon, M., Megarbane, B., Joly, L. M., Chevret, S., Adrie, C., Barnoud, D., Bleichner, G., Bruel, C., Choukroun, G., et al. (2007) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa063446 · Cited by 1,279
Family response to critical illness: Postintensive care syndrome–family
Davidson, J. E., Jones, C., & Bienvenu, O. J. (2012) · Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1097/ccm.0b013e318236ebf9 · Cited by 936
Metadata
- Authors
- Abbott, B., Sago, J. G., Breen, C. M., Abernethy, A. P., & Tulsky, J. A.
- Venue
- Critical Care Medicine
- Published
- 2001-01
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 197-201
- ISSN
- 0090-3493 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1996557276
- Cited by
- 476
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 22.51
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Families looking back: One year after discussion of withdrawal or withholding of life-sustaining support. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/00003246-200101000-00040
- The paper
- Abbott, B., Sago, J. G., Breen, C. M., Abernethy, A. P., & Tulsky, J. A. (2001). Families looking back: One year after discussion of withdrawal or withholding of life-sustaining support. Critical Care Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1097/00003246-200101000-00040
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.