Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27274205›Full record

ArticlePatient preference and adherence2016

Typology of end-of-life priorities in Saudi females: averaging analysis and Q-methodology.

Muhammad M Hammami, Safa Hammami, Hala A Amer, Nesrine A Khodr

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 23% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Muhammad M HammamiClinical Studies and Empirical Ethics Department, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Centre, Alfaisal University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia; College of Medicine, Alfaisal University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Safa HammamiClinical Studies and Empirical Ethics Department, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Centre, Alfaisal University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Hala A AmerClinical Studies and Empirical Ethics Department, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Centre, Alfaisal University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Nesrine A KhodrClinical Studies and Empirical Ethics Department, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Centre, Alfaisal University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
King Faisal Specialist Hospital & Research Centre · SA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUnderstanding culture-and sex-related end-of-life preferences is essential to provide quality end-of-life care. We have previously explored end-of-life choices in Saudi males and found important culture-related differences and that Q-methodology is useful in identifying intraculture, opinion-based groups. Here, we explore Saudi females' end-of-life choices.

methodsA volunteer sample of 68 females rank-ordered 47 opinion statements on end-of-life issues into a nine-category symmetrical distribution. The ranking scores of the statements were analyzed by averaging analysis and Q-methodology.

resultsThe mean age of the females in the sample was 30.3 years (range, 19-55 years). Among them, 51% reported average religiosity, 78% reported very good health, 79% reported very good life quality, and 100% reported high-school education or more. The extreme five overall priorities were to be able to say the statement of faith, be at peace with God, die without having the body exposed, maintain dignity, and resolve all conflicts. The extreme five overall dis-priorities were to die in the hospital, die well dressed, be informed about impending death by family/friends rather than doctor, die at peak of life, and not know if one has a fatal illness. Q-methodology identified five opinion-based groups with qualitatively different characteristics: "physical and emotional privacy concerned, family caring" (younger, lower religiosity), "whole person" (higher religiosity), "pain and informational privacy concerned" (lower life quality), "decisional privacy concerned" (older, higher life quality), and "life quantity concerned, family dependent" (high life quality, low life satisfaction). Out of the extreme 14 priorities/dis-priorities for each group, 21%-50% were not represented among the extreme 20 priorities/dis-priorities for the entire sample.

conclusionConsistent with the previously reported findings in Saudi males, transcendence and dying in the hospital were the extreme end-of-life priority and dis-priority, respectively, in Saudi females. Body modesty was a major overall concern; however, concerns about pain, various types of privacy, and life quantity were variably emphasized by the five opinion-based groups but masked by averaging analysis.

Indexed as

end-of-life dis-prioritiesend-of-life prioritiesMuslimsQ-methodologySaudi femalesscore-averaging

Identifiers

PMID27274205
PMCPMC4876108
OpenAlexW2394674449

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.