Withdrawing and withholding life-sustaining treatment

Clicks: 294
ID: 266578
1970
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Popular

Ranked #14 of 17 articles by views in british journal of nursing (mark allen publishing)

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
There has been considerable criticism recently over the use of end-of-life pathways and do-not-resuscitate orders with vulnerable, incapable patients, often without discussion. This criticism has led to press and judicial scrutiny of the lawfulness of decisions to withdraw or withhold life-sustainin …
Reference Key
r1970britishwithdrawing Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Griffith R
Are you one of these authors? Claim your profile
Journal british journal of nursing (mark allen publishing)
Year 1970
DOI
DOI not found
URL
https://www.pubmed.gov/23132007/
Keywords
National Center for Biotechnology Information NCBI NLM MEDLINE humans pubmed abstract nih national institutes of health national library of medicine Euthanasia passive united kingdom pmid:23132007 doi:10.12968/bjon.2012.21.20.1234 richard griffith resuscitation orders terminal care withholding treatment / legislation & jurisprudence*

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.