ArticleBMC health services research2017
Patient reported outcome measures for measuring dignity in palliative and end of life care: a scoping review.
Article in BMC health services research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Dignity in the Pediatric Population: A Systematic Review.Journal of pain and symptom management · 2024Pooled it
- Measuring the success of interventions for caregivers: a focussed systematic review.Current opinion in supportive and palliative care · 2019Pooled it
- Measuring End-of-Life Care: Development of a National Questionnaire for Bereaved Family Members.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- A scoping review of palliative care assessment tools.BMC palliative care · 2026Article
- Improving Quality of End-of-Life Care Through the K-HOPE Consultative Palliative Care Model: A Prospective Study in a Tertiary Hospital.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2026Article
- Unfolding States of Mind: A Dissociative-Psychedelic Model of Ketamine-Assisted Psychotherapy in Palliative Care.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Article
- Understanding the extent to which PROMs and PREMs used with older people with severe frailty capture their multidimensional needs: A scoping review.Palliative medicine · 2024Article
- Experience or perception: What healthcare providers need when using the Utrecht Symptom Diary-4 Dimensional, a mixed-methods study.Palliative care and social practice · 2024Article
- Feasibility of PROMIS using computerized adaptive testing during inpatient rehabilitation.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2023Article
- Identification of Digital Health Priorities for Palliative Care Research: Modified Delphi Study.JMIR aging · 2022Article
- Protocol for a scoping review exploring the use of patient-reported outcomes in adult social care.BMJ open · 2021Article
- German tariffs for the ICECAP-Supportive Care Measure (ICECAP-SCM) for use in economic evaluations at the end of life.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2021Article
- Core Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) and PRO Measures (PROMs) for Polypharmacy Medicines Reviews: A Sequential Mixed-Methods Study.Patient preference and adherence · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatient reported outcome measures are frequently used standard questionnaires or tools designed to collect information from patients regarding their health status and care. Their use enables accurate and relevant insight into changes in health, quality of life, and symptom severity to be acquired. The purpose of this scoping review was to identify PROMs that had been subject to rigorous development and were suitable for use in palliative and end of life care for clinical practice and/or research purposes. The review had a specific focus on measures which could be used to assess perceptions of dignity in these contexts.
methodsA scoping review of English-language papers published between 2005 and 2015. Searches were devised in conjunction with an information science specialist and were undertaken in Medline; PsycINFO; EMBASE; CINAHL; Social Science Citation Index; ASSIA; CENTRAL; CDSR; DARE; HTA; Oxford PROM Bibliography; PROQOLID, using dignity related terms such as personhood; dignity or dignified; patient-centred care; which were linked (via the Boolean operator "AND") to care-related terms such as terminal care; hospice care; palliative care; end of life. Papers were assessed against inclusion criteria and appraised for quality.
resultsThe search strategy produced an initial 7845 articles. After three rounds of eligibility assessment, eight articles discussing eight patients reported outcome measures were found to meet the inclusion criteria and were included in the final review. These underwent a thorough critical appraisal process. All seven studies were empirical research focused on the development and testing of a PROM.
conclusionsThe eight patient reported outcome measures had all undergone some psychometric testing, and covered dignity aspects suggesting that they could be considered for use for research purposes to assess dignity. There were also indications that some could be implemented into a clinical setting. However, each measure had limitations and scope for further development.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.