Switch to: Citations

Add references

You must login to add references.
  1. ‘Hitting you over the head’: Oncologists’ disclosure of prognosis to advanced cancer patients.Elisa J. Gordon & Christopher K. Daugherty - 2003 - Bioethics 17 (2):142-168.
    The disclosure of prognosis to terminally ill patients has emerged as a recent concern given greater demands for patient involvement in medical decision‐making in the United States. As part of the informed consent process, American physicians are legally and ethically obligated to provide information to such patients about the risks, benefits, and alternatives of all available treatment options including the use of experimental therapies. Although not legally required, the disclosure of a terminal prognosis is ethically justified because it upholds the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  • Informed Consent in a Multicultural Cancer Patient Population: implications for nursing practice.Donelle M. Barnes, Anne J. Davis, Tracy Moran, Carmen J. Portillo & Barbara A. Koenig - 1998 - Nursing Ethics 5 (5):412-423.
    Obtaining informed consent, an ethical obligation of nurses and other health care providers, occurs routinely when patients make health care decisions. The values underlying informed consent (promotion of patients’ well-being and respect for their self-determination) are embedded in the dominant American culture. Nurses who apply the USA’s cultural values of informed consent when caring for patients who come from other cultures encounter some ethical dilemmas. This descriptive study, conducted with Latino, Chinese and Anglo-American cancer patients in a large, public, west-coast (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Assessing Patient Perspectives on Receiving Bad News: A Survey of 1337 Patients With Life-Changing Diagnoses.Reza D. Mirza, Melody Ren, Arnav Agarwal & Gordon H. Guyatt - 2019 - AJOB Empirical Bioethics 10 (1):36-43.
    Background: Guidelines for breaking bad news are largely directed at and validated in oncology patients, based on expert opinion, and neglect those with other diagnoses. We sought to determine whether existing guidelines for breaking bad news, particularly SPIKES, are consistent with patient preferences across patient populations. Methods: Patients from an online community responded to 5 open-ended and 11 Likert-scale questions identifying their preferences in having bad news delivered. Patient participants received a diagnosis of cancer, lupus, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, multiple sclerosis, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation