Cited by 39Palliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesFamily and Patient Care in Intensive Care UnitsEthics in medical practice

Physicians Rarely Elicit Critically Ill Patients’ Previously Expressed Treatment Preferences in Intensive Care Units

Open access
Chiarchiaro, Jared, Ernecoff, Natalie C., Scheunemann, Leslie P., Hough, Catherine L., Carson, Shannon S., Peterson, Michael W., Anderson, Wendy G., Steingrub, Jay S. +2 more·2017·American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine

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 · 10.1164/rccm.201611-2242le

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Clinicians often fail to adequately elicit patient treatment preferences, provide guidance about the surrogate's role, disclose likely long-term outcomes, and discuss the option of comfort-focused care.

    “clinicians often fail to adequately elicit patient treatment preferences, provide guidance about the surrogate’s role, disclose likely long-term outcomes, and discuss the option of comfort-focused care (7–13).”

    From Effects of a Personalized Web-Based Decision Aid for Surrogate Decision Makers of Patients With Prolonged Mechanical Ventilation (2019) · cites this paper as [13]

    The Discussion reports that physicians rarely elicited patients’ previously expressed treatment preferences during ICU goals-of-care conversations. The paper does not report whether clinicians provided guidance about surrogates’ roles, disclosed likely long-term outcomes, or discussed comfort-focused care. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [4]Crabtree BF, Miller WL. Doing qualitative research. Sage Publications; 1999.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chiarchiaro, J., Ernecoff, N. C., Scheunemann, L. P., Hough, C. L., Carson, S. S., Peterson, M. W., Anderson, W. G., Steingrub, J. S., Arnold, R. M., & White, D. B.
Affiliations
  • University of Pittsburgh (US)
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
  • University of Washington (US)
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • Tufts University (US)
Venue
American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine
Published
2017-07
Volume
196
Issue
2
Pages
242-245
ISSN
  • 1073-449X (ISSN-L)
  • 1535-4970
OpenAlex
W2735959631
Cited by
39
References
8
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 4
FWCI
5.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (KL2TR000146)
  • National Institute on Aging (P30AG024827)
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (R01HL094553, T32HL007563)
  • National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Radiological and Ultrasound Technology › Family and Patient Care in Intensive Care Units
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Ethics in medical practice
Keywords
treatment preferences, critically ill patients, intensive care unit, physician-patient communication, advance care planning, patient preferences, end-of-life care
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Communication, Female, Humans, Intensive Care Units, Male, Middle Aged, Physician-Patient Relations, Practice Patterns, Physicians', Professional-Family Relations, Prospective Studies, Surveys and Questionnaires, Respiratory Distress Syndrome, United States, Cohort Studies, Advance Directives, Critical Illness, Advance Care Planning, Qualitative Research, Patient Preference

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