Doctor, what would you do? An ANSWER for patients requesting advice about value-laden decisions

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This article presents a previously published framework, summarized in the mnemonic ANSWER (A, Active listening; N, Needs assessment; S, Selfawareness/ reflection; W, Whose perspective?; E, Elicit values; R, Respond) for how to respond to the question, "Doctor, what would you do?" when considering medical decisions that are preference-sensitive, meaning there is limited or debatable evidence to guide clinical recommendations, or are value-laden, such that the "right" decision may differ based on the context or values of a given individual. Using the mnemonic and practical examples, we attempt to make the framework for an ethically appropriate approach to these conversations more accessible for clinicians. Rather than a decision rule, this mnemonic represents a set of points to consider when physicians are considering an ethically acceptable response that fosters trust and rapport. We apply this approach to a case of periviable counseling, among the more emotionally challenging and value-laden antenatal decisions faced by providers and patients.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)740-745
Number of pages6
JournalPediatrics
Volume136
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 1 2015

Fingerprint

Needs Assessment
Counseling
Physicians

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pediatrics, Perinatology, and Child Health

Cite this

Doctor, what would you do? An ANSWER for patients requesting advice about value-laden decisions. / Tucker Edmonds, Brownsne; Torke, Alexia; Helft, Paul; Wocial, Lucia D.

In: Pediatrics, Vol. 136, No. 4, 01.10.2015, p. 740-745.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{a7c036ed1aea45bfa34f1e925f946887,
title = "Doctor, what would you do? An ANSWER for patients requesting advice about value-laden decisions",
abstract = "This article presents a previously published framework, summarized in the mnemonic ANSWER (A, Active listening; N, Needs assessment; S, Selfawareness/ reflection; W, Whose perspective?; E, Elicit values; R, Respond) for how to respond to the question, {"}Doctor, what would you do?{"} when considering medical decisions that are preference-sensitive, meaning there is limited or debatable evidence to guide clinical recommendations, or are value-laden, such that the {"}right{"} decision may differ based on the context or values of a given individual. Using the mnemonic and practical examples, we attempt to make the framework for an ethically appropriate approach to these conversations more accessible for clinicians. Rather than a decision rule, this mnemonic represents a set of points to consider when physicians are considering an ethically acceptable response that fosters trust and rapport. We apply this approach to a case of periviable counseling, among the more emotionally challenging and value-laden antenatal decisions faced by providers and patients.",
author = "{Tucker Edmonds}, Brownsne and Alexia Torke and Paul Helft and Wocial, {Lucia D.}",
year = "2015",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1542/peds.2015-1808",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "136",
pages = "740--745",
journal = "Pediatrics",
issn = "0031-4005",
publisher = "American Academy of Pediatrics",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Doctor, what would you do? An ANSWER for patients requesting advice about value-laden decisions

AU - Tucker Edmonds, Brownsne

AU - Torke, Alexia

AU - Helft, Paul

AU - Wocial, Lucia D.

PY - 2015/10/1

Y1 - 2015/10/1

N2 - This article presents a previously published framework, summarized in the mnemonic ANSWER (A, Active listening; N, Needs assessment; S, Selfawareness/ reflection; W, Whose perspective?; E, Elicit values; R, Respond) for how to respond to the question, "Doctor, what would you do?" when considering medical decisions that are preference-sensitive, meaning there is limited or debatable evidence to guide clinical recommendations, or are value-laden, such that the "right" decision may differ based on the context or values of a given individual. Using the mnemonic and practical examples, we attempt to make the framework for an ethically appropriate approach to these conversations more accessible for clinicians. Rather than a decision rule, this mnemonic represents a set of points to consider when physicians are considering an ethically acceptable response that fosters trust and rapport. We apply this approach to a case of periviable counseling, among the more emotionally challenging and value-laden antenatal decisions faced by providers and patients.

AB - This article presents a previously published framework, summarized in the mnemonic ANSWER (A, Active listening; N, Needs assessment; S, Selfawareness/ reflection; W, Whose perspective?; E, Elicit values; R, Respond) for how to respond to the question, "Doctor, what would you do?" when considering medical decisions that are preference-sensitive, meaning there is limited or debatable evidence to guide clinical recommendations, or are value-laden, such that the "right" decision may differ based on the context or values of a given individual. Using the mnemonic and practical examples, we attempt to make the framework for an ethically appropriate approach to these conversations more accessible for clinicians. Rather than a decision rule, this mnemonic represents a set of points to consider when physicians are considering an ethically acceptable response that fosters trust and rapport. We apply this approach to a case of periviable counseling, among the more emotionally challenging and value-laden antenatal decisions faced by providers and patients.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84942877465&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84942877465&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1542/peds.2015-1808

DO - 10.1542/peds.2015-1808

M3 - Article

C2 - 26416929

AN - SCOPUS:84942877465

VL - 136

SP - 740

EP - 745

JO - Pediatrics

JF - Pediatrics

SN - 0031-4005

IS - 4

ER -