↓ Skip to main content

Global variability in withholding and withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment in the intensive care unit: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in Intensive Care Medicine, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
223 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
185 Mendeley
Title
Global variability in withholding and withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment in the intensive care unit: a systematic review
Published in
Intensive Care Medicine, April 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00134-015-3810-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

N. M. Mark, S. G. Rayner, N. J. Lee, J. R. Curtis

Abstract

Prior studies identified high variability in prevalence of withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment in the ICU. Variability in end-of-life decision-making has been reported at many levels: between countries, ICUs, and individual intensivists. We performed a systematic review examining regional, national, inter-hospital, and inter-physician variability in withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment in the ICU. Using a predefined search strategy, we queried three electronic databases for peer-reviewed articles addressing withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment in adult patients in the ICU. Data were analyzed for variability in prevalence of withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment. Withholding of life-sustaining treatment was also examined where information was provided. An assessment tool was developed to quantify the risk of bias in the included articles. We identified 1284 studies, with 56 included after review. Most studies had unclear or high risk of bias, primarily due to unclear case definitions or potential confounding. The mean prevalence of withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment for patients who died varied from 0 to 84.1 % between studies, with standard deviation of 23.7 %. Sensitivity analysis of general ICU patients yielded similar results. Withholding also varied between 5.3 and 67.3 % (mean 27.3, SD 18.5 %). Substantial variability was found between world regions, countries, individual ICUs within a country, and individual intensivists within one ICU. We identified substantial variability in the withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment across world regions and countries. Similar variability existed between ICUs within countries and even between providers within the same ICU. Further study is necessary, and could lead to interventions to improve end-of-life care in the ICU.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users 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 185 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 184 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 23 12%
Student > Master 23 12%
Other 19 10%
Student > Postgraduate 16 9%
Student > Bachelor 14 8%
Other 50 27%
Unknown 40 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 83 45%
Nursing and Health Professions 22 12%
Social Sciences 5 3%
Neuroscience 4 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 2%
Other 12 6%
Unknown 56 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 06 August 2021.
All research outputs
#13,199,636
of 22,800,560 outputs
Outputs from Intensive Care Medicine
#3,659
of 4,978 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#124,260
of 265,380 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Intensive Care Medicine
#44
of 94 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,800,560 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,978 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.0. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 265,380 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 94 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.