Definitional confusion in nurses' and physicians' attitudes toward euthanasia in India: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Clinical Snapshot

Key Findings

• P Value: Not reported

• Effect Size: Pooled prevalence of 16%

• Primary Outcome: Prevalence of approval for narrowly-defined euthanasia

• Nnt Or Sensitivity: Range of approval rates: 12-20% across individual studies

• Confidence Interval: 95% CI: 0.13-0.19

Clinical Application

High feasibility for informing educational programs and policy discussions about end-of-life care definitions Limited direct applicability to Australian practice due to different legal frameworks, but relevant for understanding definitional clarity in end-of-life care research and multicultural healthcare settings Indian healthcare professionals, particularly nurses and physicians involved in end-of-life care

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: In India, the term euthanasia is frequently used to describe a wide range of end-of-life practices, including withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment and administration of lethal drugs. Such usage diverges from more narrow definitions that restrict euthanasia to the intentional administration of lethal drugs. OBJECTIVES AND SIGNIFICANCE OF THE RESULTS: This systematic review and meta-analysis examines how euthanasia has been defined and operationalized in quantitative studies of Indian physicians' and nurses' attitudes, and estimates the prevalence of approval when euthanasia is defined narrowly. METHODS: Following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, searches were conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and CINAHL for studies published from 2010 onward. Two investigators independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). Studies were included in the meta-analysis only if they reported attitudes toward euthanasia as narrowly defined. RESULTS: Nine studies met inclusion criteria for the systematic review. Definitions of euthanasia varied considerably, and several studies combined attitudes toward treatment withdrawal with attitudes toward the administration of lethal drugs. Four studies reporting on 519 nurses and physicians provided data suitable for meta-analysis. Approval of euthanasia, defined as the intentional administration of lethal drugs, ranged from 12% to 20%, with a pooled prevalence of 16% (95% confidence interval: 0.13-0.19). This prevalence is notably lower than in earlier reports on Indian healthcare professionals' attitudes. CONCLUSION: Definitional inconsistency substantially affects reported attitudes toward euthanasia in Indian research. When euthanasia is defined narrowly, approval among healthcare professionals is low and consistent across studies. These findings highlight the need for conceptual clarity in future research to support accurate interpretation of empirical data and to strengthen the contribution of studies on ethical attitudes to ethical and palliative care scholarship.

References

1. 1.Kashyap, K., & Gielen, J. (2026). Definitional confusion in nurses' and physicians' attitudes toward euthanasia in India: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Palliative & Supportive Care. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1478951526102235