MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117462343 · doi:10.1017/s1478951525101399

The experiences and opinions of Polish medical personnel regarding limitations of futile treatment in intensive care units – A questionnaire study

2025· article· en· W7117462343 on OpenAlexaff
Paweł Pasieka, Wojciech Skupnik, MAGDALENA FRONCZEK, Roman Jaeschke, Wojciech Szczeklik

Bibliographic record

VenuePalliative & Supportive Care · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntensive careLegislationMEDLINEIntensive care unitPalliative careCritical care nursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Objectives Futile treatment is defined as maintenance of organ function without achieving meaningful goals of care. Poland is characterized by low prevalence of introducing limitations of treatment in intensive care units (ICUs). The aim of the study was to conduct a questionnaire study to evaluate the approach of Polish medical personnel to futile treatment in the ICUs. Materials and Methods We conducted an anonymous questionnaire study during a national intensive care conference in April 2023. We collected data on participants’ experiences with limiting futile treatment and their demographics. Statistical analysis comparing the responses between respondents with shorter (less than 10 years) or longer (10 years or more) work experience was conducted with a chi-squared test with residual analysis and Bonferroni correction. Results 354 respondents completed the questionnaire. Most participants (94.5%) found discussing end-of-life care with patients important. Additionally, 81.6% believed that the medical personnel should be more decisive than the patient’s family regarding end-of-life care decisions. While 81% were aware of the existence of futile treatment protocol, only 35% used it regularly. Fear of legal consequences (61.9%) or family’s reaction (55.6%) were the most common reasons for not adhering to existing guidelines. Improving hospital procedures (83.6%) and proper legislation (67.2%) were commonly suggested measures to improve end-of-life care. Respondents with shorter work experience more often reported no awareness of futile treatment protocol (28.7% vs. 6.9%, p < 0.001) as well as no experience discussing treatment limitations with patients (24.6% vs. 8.2%, p < 0.001) or their families (20.0% vs. 3.8%) compared to the clinicians with longer work experience. Significance of results Despite widespread recognition of the unethical nature of futile treatment, it remains controversial among Polish ICU clinicians. Improvement of legislation and hospital procedures could contribute to improvement of clinicians’ and patients’ well-being when facing end-of-life care decisions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.277
Threshold uncertainty score0.746

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.147
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.286 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePalliative & Supportive CareSame topicPalliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesFrench-language works237,207