Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28814321›Full record

ArticleBMC palliative care2017

Relatives' perceived quality of palliative care: comparisons between care settings in which patients die.

Dolf de Boer, Jolien M Hofstede, Anke J E de Veer, Natasja J H Raijmakers, Anneke L Francke

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC palliative care, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing 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

20 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. The quality of end of life care for Danish cancer patients who have received specialized palliative: a national survey using the Danish version of VOICES-SF.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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.

Dolf de BoerNIVEL, Netherlands Institute of Health Services Research, P.O. Box 1568, 3500, Utrecht, BN, Netherlands. d.deboer@nivel.nl.
Jolien M HofstedeNIVEL, Netherlands Institute of Health Services Research, P.O. Box 1568, 3500, Utrecht, BN, Netherlands.
Anke J E de VeerNIVEL, Netherlands Institute of Health Services Research, P.O. Box 1568, 3500, Utrecht, BN, Netherlands.
Natasja J H RaijmakersNIVEL, Netherlands Institute of Health Services Research, P.O. Box 1568, 3500, Utrecht, BN, Netherlands.
Anneke L FranckeNIVEL, Netherlands Institute of Health Services Research, P.O. Box 1568, 3500, Utrecht, BN, Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDying in the preferred setting is an indicator of good palliative care quality. Most people prefer to die at home. But does the quality of care as perceived by their relatives vary depending on the care setting that is the place of death? The aim is to compare (from the relatives perspective) whether there are perceived differences in the quality of palliative care between the settings in which people die.

methodsMultivariate linear regression analyses have been carried out using an existing dataset containing information collected using the relatives' version of the Consumer Quality Index (CQ-index) Palliative Care. The dataset includes 1368 relatives of patients with a wide variety of conditions who died in various locations: at home, in hospital, in residential care for the elderly, a hospice, palliative care unit or in another institution (e.g. institutions for people with intellectual disabilities or mental healthcare institutions). The relatives were the first contacts (family members or other people close to the patient) and they received the survey between 6 weeks and 6 months after the bereavement.

resultsBased on the raw data, differences between locations in terms of the perceived quality of care initially appeared inconsistent. The multivariate regression analyses however showed that relatives of people who died at home were generally the most positive about the palliative care that the patient and they themselves received when the patient was dying. The care provided by hospices also received a relatively good rating. In hospitals and in residential settings for care of the elderly, the care was rated less highly by the relatives.

conclusionsThe quality of palliative care as experienced from the relatives' perspective is highest when the patient dies at home or in a hospice. This is an argument for letting people die at home, if they so wish, as far as possible and feasible.

Indexed as

PerceptionAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFamilyFemaleHumansLinear ModelsMaleMiddle AgedPalliative CarePsychometricsQuality of Health CareSurveys and QuestionnairesHome care serviceHospiceHospitalNursing homePalliative careQuality of health care

Identifiers

PMID28814321
PMCPMC5559822

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.