SynthesisPalliative & supportive care2017
A systematic review of religious beliefs about major end-of-life issues in the five major world religions.
Synthesis in Palliative & supportive care, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers, 4 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
46 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Part 3: Ethics: 2025 American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care.Circulation · 2025Guideline
- Christian perspectives on palliative sedation: a literature study.BMC palliative care · 2025Pooled it
- Muslims and End-of-Life Healthcare in Non-Muslim Majority Nations: A Systematic Literature Review.Journal of pain and symptom management · 2024Pooled it
- Nutrition and hydration for people living with dementia near the end of life: A qualitative systematic review.Journal of advanced nursing · 2021Pooled it
- Beyond one-size-fits-all: mapping information-seeking and decision-making pathways in cancer care.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Article
- Advance care planning uptake in the severely frail.BMC palliative care · 2026Observational
- Euthanasia in Syria: an examination of medical student attitudes and predictors in a conflict zone.BMC medical ethics · 2026Article
- Scalpels and Standards: What Students Consider Ethical, Unethical, and Ethically Challenging in the Anatomy Lab.Medical science educator · 2026Article
- Frames of dying: a qualitative study of end-of-life experiences of terminal Arab patients.BMC palliative care · 2025Article
- Advancing neonatal autopsy by strengthening physician belief and fostering effective family communication.Pediatric research · 2025Review
- Trends and Mortality Predictors of Delirium Among Hospitalized Older Adults: A National 5-Year Retrospective Study in Thailand.Geriatrics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Factors Associated with Family Caregivers' Intentions to Complete an Advance Directive for Individuals with Dementia: A Cross-Sectional Descriptive Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Consensus statements on end-of-life care in ICU - A Scandinavian multidisciplinary Delphi study.Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica · 2025Article
- Attitudes to End-of-Life Care and Voluntary Assisted Dying Amongst Members of the Australian Jewish community.Journal of religion and health · 2025Article
- Article
- The Effect of Religious Attitude on Death Anxiety among Patients Undergoing Hemodialysis Treatment: A Sample from Turkey.Journal of religion and health · 2024Article
- Is There Such a Thing as Theological Medicine?The Linacre quarterly · 2024Article
- Medical students' and residents' views on euthanasia.BMC medical ethics · 2023Article
- Clarifying Karma for Culturally Concordant Care.JCO global oncology · 2023Article
- The supportive care needs survey short form 34 (SCNS-SF34): translation and cultural adaptation into the Nepali language among patients with cervical cancer in Nepal.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe objective of this study was to examine the religious/spiritual beliefs of followers of the five major world religions about frequently encountered medical situations at the end of life (EoL).
methodThis was a systematic review of observational studies on the religious aspects of commonly encountered EoL situations. The databases used for retrieving studies were: Ovid MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, Ovid PsycINFO, Ovid Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Scopus. Observational studies, including surveys from healthcare providers or the general population, and case studies were included for review. Articles written from a purely theoretical or philosophical perspective were excluded.
resultsOur search strategy generated 968 references, 40 of which were included for review, while 5 studies were added from reference lists. Whenever possible, we organized the results into five categories that would be clinically meaningful for palliative care practices at the EoL: advanced directives, euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide, physical requirements (artificial nutrition, hydration, and pain management), autopsy practices, and other EoL religious considerations. A wide degree of heterogeneity was observed within religions, depending on the country of origin, level of education, and degree of intrinsic religiosity. SIGNIFICANCE OF
resultsOur review describes the religious practices pertaining to major EoL issues and explains the variations in EoL decision making by clinicians and patients based on their religious teachings and beliefs. Prospective studies with validated tools for religiosity should be performed in the future to assess the impact of religion on EoL care.
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.