A 30-Year-Old Patient Who Refuses to Be Drug Tested

Jalaly, Jalal B.; Dineen, Kelly K.; Gronowski, Ann M.

doi:10.1373/clinchem.2015.246033

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Toxicology screening can be critical in evaluating injured patients with altered mental status. Reliance on implied consent can create vulnerability for patients; a positive toxicology result could have negative ramifications if it was disclosed inappropriately 31-33 . Toxicology testing should focus exclusively on guiding the medical diagnosis and subsequent treatment.…”

Section: Screening and Testingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Methamphetamine in Orthopaedics

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Methamphetamine use by orthopaedic trauma patients has risen to epidemic proportions. » Perioperative methamphetamine use by orthopaedic trauma patients requires physicians to consider both medical and psychosocial factors during treatment. » Behavioral and psychosocial effects of methamphetamine use present barriers to care. » Patients who use methamphetamine face elevated rates of complications.

show abstract

Section: Screening and Testingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Methamphetamine in Orthopaedics

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In any case, the methodical analysis of one’s own decision-making is mandatory. While ‘precision medicine’ in nephrology is still far away [ 74 ] and big data will transform our clinical decision-making [ 75 ] (some consider that the role of the physician will be enhanced, not diminished, as evidence and data grow) [ 76 ], the main ethical principles ( Table 4 ) [ 77 ] should be seriously taken into account. In this context, we believe that both ‘individualization’ of treatments (applying the principles of non-maleficence and beneficence) and, especially, ‘shared’ decision-making (respecting the patient’s autonomy and social justice) should help in resolving difficult dilemmas between ‘treating’ or ‘waiting’ in any particular situation.…”

Section: Ethical Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evidence in chronic kidney disease–mineral and bone disorder guidelines: is it time to treat or time to wait?

Bover

Ureña-Torres

Mateu

et al. 2020

Clinical Kidney Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Chronic kidney disease–mineral and bone disorder (CKD–MBD) is one of the many important complications associated with CKD and may at least partially explain the extremely high morbidity and mortality among CKD patients. The 2009 Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Clinical Practice Guideline document was based on the best information available at that time and was designed not only to provide information but also to assist in decision-making. In addition to the international KDIGO Work Group, which included worldwide experts, an independent Evidence Review Team was assembled to ensure rigorous review and grading of the existing evidence. Based on the evidence from new clinical trials, an updated Clinical Practice Guideline was published in 2017. In this review, we focus on the conceptual and practical evolution of clinical guidelines (from eMinence-based medicine to eVidence-based medicine and ‘living’ guidelines), highlight some of the current important CKD–MBD-related changes, and underline the poor or extremely poor level of evidence present in those guidelines (as well as in other areas of nephrology). Finally, we emphasize the importance of individualization of treatments and shared decision-making (based on important ethical considerations and the ‘best available evidence’), which may prove useful in the face of the uncertainty over the decision whether ‘to treat’ or ‘to wait’.

show abstract