↓ Skip to main content

The self-fulfilling prophecy in intensive care

Overview of attention for article published in Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics, November 2009
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
109 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
69 Mendeley
Title
The self-fulfilling prophecy in intensive care
Published in
Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics, November 2009
DOI 10.1007/s11017-009-9120-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dominic Wilkinson

Abstract

Predictions of poor prognosis for critically ill patients may become self-fulfilling if life-sustaining treatment or resuscitation is subsequently withheld on the basis of that prediction. This paper outlines the epistemic and normative problems raised by self-fulfilling prophecies (SFPs) in intensive care. Where predictions affect outcome, it can be extremely difficult to ascertain the mortality rate for patients if all treatment were provided. SFPs may lead to an increase in mortality for cohorts of patients predicted to have poor prognosis, they may lead doctors to feel causally responsible for the deaths of their patients, and they may compromise honest communication with patients and families about prognosis. However, I argue that the self-fulfilling prophecy is inevitable when life-sustaining treatment is withheld or withdrawn in the face of uncertainty. SFPs do not necessarily make treatment limitation decisions problematic. To minimize the effects of SFPs, it is essential to carefully collect and appraise evidence about prognosis. Doctors need to be honest with themselves and with patients and their families about uncertainty and the limits of knowledge.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
Netherlands 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 65 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 11 16%
Researcher 10 14%
Student > Master 10 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 6%
Other 4 6%
Other 16 23%
Unknown 14 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 29 42%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 7%
Psychology 5 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 3%
Philosophy 2 3%
Other 10 14%
Unknown 16 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 February 2013.
All research outputs
#19,998,579
of 24,575,707 outputs
Outputs from Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics
#245
of 318 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#160,541
of 174,205 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics
#3
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,575,707 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 318 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 174,205 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.