Article info
Feature article
Autonomy-based criticisms of the patient preference predictor
- Correspondence to Dr David Wendler, Department of Bioethics, National Institutes of Health Clinical Center, Bethesda, Maryland, USA; dwendler{at}cc.nih.gov
Citation
Autonomy-based criticisms of the patient preference predictor
Publication history
- Received May 26, 2021
- Accepted November 29, 2021
- First published December 17, 2021.
Online issue publication
April 25, 2022
Article Versions
- Previous version (17 December 2021).
- You are viewing the most recent version of this article.
Request permissions
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Copyright information
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Other content recommended for you
- Clarifying substituted judgement: the endorsed life approach
- A new method for making treatment decisions for incapacitated patients: what do patients think about the use of a patient preference predictor?
- Including patients in resuscitation decisions in Switzerland: from doing more to doing better
- Implementation and staff understanding of shared decision-making in the context of recovery-oriented care across US Veterans Health Administration (VHA) inpatient mental healthcare units: a mixed-methods evaluation
- Response to commentaries: ‘autonomy-based criticisms of the patient preference predictor’
- A case study from the perspective of medical ethics: refusal of treatment in an ambulance
- ‘Doctor, what would you do in my position?’ Health professionals and the decision-making process in pregnancy monitoring
- Ethics of the algorithmic prediction of goal of care preferences: from theory to practice
- Consent for anaesthesia
- Substituted decision making and the dispositional choice account