Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25296653›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2014

'Conditional candour' and 'knowing me': an interpretive description study on patient preferences for physician behaviours during end-of-life communication.

Amane Abdul-Razzak, John You, Diana Sherifali, Jessica Simon, Kevin Brazil

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing 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

31 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. Review
  8. Article
  9. Older Adults' Experiences and Expectations of Doctor-Patient Interactions During Early Hospital Care.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Communication at the End of Life.Journal of hospice and palliative care · 2021
    Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Amane Abdul-RazzakDivision of Palliative Medicine, Department of Oncology, University of Calgary, Tom Baker Cancer Center, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
John YouDepartment of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Diana SherifaliSchool of Nursing, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Jessica SimonDepartment of Oncology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Kevin BrazilSchool of Nursing and Midwifery, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo understand patients' preferences for physician behaviours during end-of-life communication.

methodsWe used interpretive description methods to analyse data from semistructured, one-on-one interviews with patients admitted to general medical wards at three Canadian tertiary care hospitals. Study recruitment took place from October 2012 to August 2013. We used a purposive, maximum variation sampling approach to recruit hospitalised patients aged ≥55 years with a high risk of mortality within 6-12 months, and with different combinations of the following demographic variables: race (Caucasian vs non-Caucasian), gender and diagnosis (cancer vs non-cancer).

resultsA total of 16 participants were recruited, most of whom (69%) were women and 70% had a non-cancer diagnosis. Two major concepts regarding helpful physician behaviour during end-of-life conversations emerged: (1) 'knowing me', which reflects the importance of acknowledging the influence of family roles and life history on values and priorities expressed during end-of-life communication, and (2) 'conditional candour', which describes a process of information exchange that includes an assessment of patients' readiness, being invited to the conversation, and sensitive delivery of information.

conclusionsOur findings suggest that patients prefer a nuanced approach to truth telling when having end-of-life discussions with their physician. This may have important implications for clinical practice and end-of-life communication training initiatives.

Indexed as

CommunicationPatient PreferencePhysician-Patient RelationsTerminal CareTruth DisclosureAdvance Care PlanningAdvance DirectivesAgedCanadaFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedQualitative Researchadvance care planningcritical illnessend-of-life communicationpatient preferencephysician-patient relations

Identifiers

PMID25296653
PMCPMC4194750

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.