Practice and Attitudes of Physicians Regarding Disclosure of Information to Patients With Serious Illness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Health Information disclosure is the cornerstone in respecting the patients’ autonomy and beneficence, particularly in the context of serious illness. Some Middle Eastern cultures prioritise beneficence over patient autonomy. This may be used as a justification when patient’s family takes over the decision-making process. Although guidelines and protocols regarding information disclosure are fast evolving, there are no sufficient data regarding the application of these guidelines in the clinical context. The objective of this study is to explore the truth disclosure practices of physicians in Bahrain. METHOD: In this cross sectional study, a random sample of 234 physicians was obtained from the database of Salmaniya Medical Complex (the largest public hospital in Bahrain). We used self-administered 21-item questionnaire to assess the practices and attitudes of physicians regarding disclosure of information to patients with serious illnesses. RESULTS: A total of 200 physicians completed the questionnaire with a response rate of 69.6%. The question about the usual policy of disclosure revealed that 62.5% (125) of the doctors would always disclose the diagnosis to the patients, 26% (52) would often disclose the diagnosis and only 1% would never disclose the real diagnosis to a competent adult. Only 15% of the physicians would never make exceptions to their policy of “telling the patient” while all remaining physicians (85%) made exceptions to their policy either often, occasionally or rarely. The most common reason for not disclosing the diagnosis was family request (39.5%). About 64.5% of the physicians were not aware of any existing protocol or policy for diagnosis disclosure to patients. There was no statistically significant association between doctors’ policy of disclosure and other demographic variables. CONCLUSION: Most physicians opt to disclose the truth; however, the majority would make exceptions at some point particularly upon family request. Regional truth disclosure policies should take into consideration the interplay and balance between patient autonomy and the role played by the family in the decision-making process.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".