Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26968338›Full record

ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2017

End-of-life care decisions for haemodialysis patients - 'We only tend to have that discussion with them when they start deteriorating'.

Sophia Lazenby, Adrian Edwards, Raymond Samuriwo, Stephen Riley, Mary Ann Murray, Andrew Carson-Stevens

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
–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

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Breaking Through the Glass Ceiling-HavingThe Canadian journal of nursing research = Revue canadienne de recherche en sciences infirmieres · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Characterizing end-of-life communication in families.Palliative care and social practice · 2023
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Observational
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

6 authors.

Sophia LazenbyPrimary Care Patient Safety (PISA) Research Group, Division of Population Medicine, School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, Wales, UK.
Adrian EdwardsDivision of Population Medicine, School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, Wales, UK.
Raymond SamuriwoSchool of Healthcare Sciences, Cardiff University, Cardiff, Wales, UK.
Stephen RileySchool of Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, Wales, UK.
Mary Ann MurrayNursing Palliative Research and Education Unit, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Andrew Carson-StevensPrimary and Emergency Care Research (PRIME) Centre Wales, Cardiff University, Cardiff, Wales, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHaemodialysis patients receive very little involvement in their end-of-life care decisions. Issues relating to death and dying are commonly avoided until late in their illness. This study aimed to explore the experiences and perceptions of doctors and nurses in nephrology for involving haemodialysis patients in end-of-life care decisions.

methodsA semi-structured qualitative interview study with 15 doctors and five nurses and thematic analysis of their accounts was conducted. The setting was a large teaching hospital in Wales, UK.

resultsPrognosis is not routinely discussed with patients, in part due to a difficulty in estimation and the belief that patients do not want or need this information. Advance care planning is rarely carried out, and end-of-life care discussions are seldom initiated prior to patient deterioration. There is variability in end-of-life practices amongst nephrologists; some patients are felt to be withdrawn from dialysis too late. Furthermore, the possibility and implications of withdrawal are not commonly discussed with well patients. Critical barriers hindering better end-of-life care involvement for these patients are outlined.

conclusionsThe study provides insights into the complexity of end-of-life conversations and the barriers to achieving better end-of-life communication practices. The results identify opportunities for improving the lives and deaths of haemodialysis patients.

Indexed as

CommunicationDecision MakingRenal DialysisTerminal CareAdultFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedNursesPhysiciansProfessional-Patient RelationsQualitative ResearchWalesadvance care planningdecision makingend of lifehaemodialysisnephrologistsprognosis

Identifiers

PMID26968338
PMCPMC5354044

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.