Navigating DNACPR decisions: a qualitative study of DNACPR factor variability and implementation among NHS Doctors

Our findings highlight a clear need for a more robust and equitable framework for these critical conversations, whilst also enabling clinicians to be able to make case-by-case decisions. The development of a national DNAPR policy that integrates evidence-based data may help doctors select and weigh factors appropriately, and provide a framework for the initiation of DNACPR discussions. However, such a policy must nevertheless be sufficiently flexible to permit doctors the autonomy required to make nuanced decisions on the basis of a range of patient-specific contextual assessments. Our key recommendation, therefore, is that clinicians should be supported not only by improved procedures and processes, but also by confidence that their professional judgement is rooted in the most current clinical evidence.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
BMC Medical Ethics
Published
2026-01-19
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-025-01286-2
Primary Topic
Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Navigating DNACPR decisions: a qualitative study of DNACPR factor variability and implementation among NHS Doctors

Silan Fidan, Simon Cohn
BMC Medical Ethics
Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
article

Navigating DNACPR decisions: a qualitative study of DNACPR factor variability and implementation among NHS Doctors

Silan Fidan, Simon Cohn
article en

Abstract

Our findings highlight a clear need for a more robust and equitable framework for these critical conversations, whilst also enabling clinicians to be able to make case-by-case decisions. The development of a national DNAPR policy that integrates evidence-based data may help doctors select and weigh factors appropriately, and provide a framework for the initiation of DNACPR discussions. However, such a policy must nevertheless be sufficiently flexible to permit doctors the autonomy required to make nuanced decisions on the basis of a range of patient-specific contextual assessments. Our key recommendation, therefore, is that clinicians should be supported not only by improved procedures and processes, but also by confidence that their professional judgement is rooted in the most current clinical evidence.

BMC Medical EthicsVol. 27(1)
University of London (GB), The Royal Free Hospital (GB), University College London (GB)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 85%
Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Navigating DNACPR decisions: a qualitative study of DNACPR factor variability and implementation among NHS Doctors — Silan Fidan, Simon Cohn · BMC Medical Ethics (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS