Patients’ adherence to recommendations can unjustly influence their candidacy for a current intervention.

Medicine has always maintained social, political, and economic structures that have exacerbated Black and Brown persons’ lived embodiment of racism.

Improving health outcomes through patient-centered care is one way to build value for stakeholders in health care.

Hospital lawyers’ practices shape risk management operations, influence clinicians’ morale, and affect patient care.

Clinical decision supports create ethically complex risks and need to align patients’ and caregivers’ professed values.

Commentary by Aveena Kochar, MD, and Alia Chisty, MS, MD Co-creative teams can overcome conflict by drawing on quality improvement principles.

A lack of consensus guidelines or a belief that current evidence does not support such guidelines might be justified if a clinician expresses a commitment to patient-centered care and shared decision making.

Clarifying both patients’ and professionals’ values fosters good clinical decision making, particularly in situations of uncertainty.

Physicians, committees, and guardians all make decisions for unrepresented patients in the US. This article considers a “tiered” approach as an alternative.

When patients are unable to express their wishes and do not have surrogates or advance directives, which and whose values should inform decision making for them? We discuss ethical complexities of caring for unrepresented patients.