Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16438811›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2006

Good end-of-life care according to patients and their GPs.

Sander D Borgsteede, Corrie Graafland-Riedstra, Luc Deliens, Anneke L Francke, Jacques Thm van Eijk, Dick L Willems

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

36 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Involvement of general practitioners in palliative cancer care: a qualitative study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2013
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Sander D BorgsteedeDepartment of Public and Occupational Health, VU University Medical Center, Van der Boechorststraat 7, 1081 BT Amsterdam, The Netherlands. s.borgsteede@vumc.nl
Corrie Graafland-Riedstra
Luc Deliens
Anneke L Francke
Jacques Thm van Eijk
Dick L Willems

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMost patients prefer to die at home, where a GP provides end-of-life care. A few previous studies have been directed at the GPs' values on good end-of-life care, yet no study combined values of patients and their own GP.

aimTo explore the aspects valued by both patients and GPs in end-of-life care at home, and to reflect upon the results in the context of future developments in primary care. DESIGN OF STUDY: Interviews with patients and their own GP.

settingPrimary care in the Netherlands.

methodQualitative, semi-structured interviews with 20 GPs and 30 of their patients with a life expectancy of less than 6 months, and cancer, heart failure or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease as underlying disease.

resultsPatients and GPs had comparable perceptions of good end-of-life care. Patients and GPs identified four core items that they valued in end-of-life care: availability of the GP for home visits and after office-hours, medical competence and cooperation with other professionals, attention and continuity of care.

conclusionsFuture developments in the organisation of primary care such as the restriction of time for home visits, more part-time jobs and GP cooperatives responsible for care after office hours, may threaten valued aspects in end-of-life care.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelPatient SatisfactionAgedAged, 80 and overContinuity of Patient CareFamily PracticeFemaleHumansInterprofessional RelationsMaleMiddle AgedNetherlandsPhysician-Patient RelationsTerminal Care

Identifiers

PMID16438811
PMCPMC1821412

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.