ArticleBMC medical ethics2026
Family involvement in medical decision-making: examining the applicability of the legal framework in Flemish general practice through a vignette survey.
Article in BMC medical ethics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDespite increasing attention to the involvement of family members or informal caregivers in patient care, their role remains underdeveloped in medical decision-making (MDM) models implemented in clinical practice. Moreover, family involvement in MDM may conflict with patient rights, particularly the patient’s right to self-determination. This study aimed to assess whether Belgian general practitioners (GPs) endorse legally impermissible strategies for family involvement in MDM, and how this relates to their knowledge of the legal framework, attitudes toward MDM, sociodemographic and professional characteristics.
methodsAn online vignette survey was distributed among Dutch-speaking GPs in Belgium. The vignettes were designed using a nominal group technique, in which complex real-life cases of family involvement in MDM were discussed with GPs and medical lawyers. The survey assessed GPs’ endorsement of legally impermissible strategies for family involvement in MDM, described in four vignettes, along with their knowledge of the legal permissibility of these strategies. Regression analyses were run to examine the associations between GPs’ endorsement and their legal knowledge, attitudes toward MDM, sociodemographic and professional background variables.
resultsThe final sample consisted of 290 GPs. Depending on the vignette, 26.9% to 43.8% of respondents endorsed legally impermissible strategies, and 26.2% to 35.9% demonstrated insufficient knowledge of the relevant legal framework. Greater legal knowledge emerged as the strongest protective factor against endorsing legally impermissible strategies. However, 10.3% to 20% of respondents still endorsed such strategies despite having sufficient knowledge.
conclusionsA considerable proportion of GPs endorsed the use of legally impermissible strategies for family involvement in MDM. Considering that some of these respondents had adequate legal knowledge, findings suggest a need to reassess the responsiveness and practical applicability of the legal framework to clinical realities.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.