• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

痴呆、智力迟钝与决策能力

Dementia, mental retardation, and competency to make decisions.

作者信息

Kaplan K H, Strang J P, Ahmed I

机构信息

Department of Psychiatry, Boston University School of Medicine, MA.

出版信息

Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 1988 Nov;10(6):385-8. doi: 10.1016/0163-8343(88)90060-6.

DOI:10.1016/0163-8343(88)90060-6
PMID:3203880
Abstract

The psychiatric literature on competency indicates that a diagnosable psychiatric condition alone does not imply incompetency to make treatment decisions. Nonetheless, it is frequently assumed that individuals who are either mentally retarded or demented are incompetent to make decisions. The authors, focusing on the clinical assessment of judgment and decision making, describe two cases. In both, the patients' judgments were intact. The authors conclude: (1) Diagnosis is not the critical factor in determining competency. (2) The process of judgment and decision making has to be assessed on a case by case basis. (3) Further research is needed to develop clinical instruments to assess judgment.

摘要

精神病学文献中关于行为能力的内容表明,仅患有可诊断的精神疾病并不意味着没有做出治疗决策的行为能力。然而,人们常常认为,智力迟钝或患有痴呆症的个体没有决策能力。作者聚焦于判断力和决策能力的临床评估,描述了两个案例。在这两个案例中,患者的判断力都是完好的。作者得出结论:(1)诊断并非决定行为能力的关键因素。(2)判断力和决策能力的评估过程必须逐案进行。(3)需要开展进一步研究以开发评估判断力的临床工具。

相似文献

1
Dementia, mental retardation, and competency to make decisions.痴呆、智力迟钝与决策能力
Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 1988 Nov;10(6):385-8. doi: 10.1016/0163-8343(88)90060-6.
2
Assessment of psychiatric patients' competency to give informed consent: legal safeguard of civil right to autonomous decision-making.评估精神病患者给予知情同意的能力:自主决策民事权利的法律保障
Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2000 Oct;54(5):515-22. doi: 10.1046/j.1440-1819.2000.00746.x.
3
The capacity of people with a 'mental disability' to make a health care decision.“精神残疾”者做出医疗保健决策的能力。
Psychol Med. 2000 Mar;30(2):295-306. doi: 10.1017/s0033291700001768.
4
Legal aspects of consent 10: determining "best interests".同意的法律问题10:确定“最大利益”。
Br J Nurs. 2001;10(14):916-7. doi: 10.12968/bjon.2001.10.14.5279.
5
Assessment of mental competency in community-dwelling elderly.社区居住老年人的心理能力评估。
Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord. 1999 Apr-Jun;13(2):80-7. doi: 10.1097/00002093-199904000-00004.
6
Shifting competency during hospitalization: a model for informed consent decisions.住院期间能力的转变:一种知情同意决策模型。
Hosp Community Psychiatry. 1986 Dec;37(12):1256-60. doi: 10.1176/ps.37.12.1256.
7
Living wills and substituted judgments: a critical analysis.生前遗嘱与替代判断:批判性分析
Med Health Care Philos. 2001;4(2):169-83. doi: 10.1023/a:1011450017960.
8
Competency and consent in dementia.痴呆症中的能力与同意
J Am Geriatr Soc. 1998 Jul;46(7):922-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.1998.tb02734.x.
9
Cognitive models of physicians' legal standard and personal judgments of competency in patients with Alzheimer's disease.医生对阿尔茨海默病患者法律标准及能力个人判断的认知模型。
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2000 Aug;48(8):919-27. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2000.tb06888.x.
10
Research participation of individuals with dementia.患有痴呆症的个体的研究参与情况。
Res Gerontol Nurs. 2009 Apr;2(2):94-102. doi: 10.3928/19404921-20090401-01.

引用本文的文献

1
Hopes and Cautions for Instrument-Based Evaluation of Consent Capacity: Results of a Construct Validity Study of Three Instruments.基于工具的同意能力评估的希望与警示:三种工具的结构效度研究结果
Ethics Law Aging Rev. 2004 Aug 1;10.
2
Capacity to consent to treatment: empirical comparison of three instruments in older adults with and without dementia.同意治疗的能力:对患有和未患痴呆症的老年人使用三种工具的实证比较。
Gerontologist. 2004 Apr;44(2):166-75. doi: 10.1093/geront/44.2.166.
3
Competency and the Capacity to Make Treatment Decisions: A Primer for Primary Care Physicians.
能力与治疗决策能力:基层医疗医生入门指南
Prim Care Companion J Clin Psychiatry. 1999 Oct;1(5):131-141. doi: 10.4088/pcc.v01n0501.