Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29270050›Full record

ArticleCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.)2017

Toward improved goals-of-care documentation in advanced cancer: report on the development of a quality improvement initiative.

I Harle, S Karim, W Raskin, W M Hopman, C M Booth

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Palliative medicine reports · 2025
    Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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.

I HarleDepartments of Medicine.
S KarimOncology, and.
W RaskinDepartments of Medicine.
W M HopmanPublic Health Sciences, Queen's University; and.
C M BoothDepartments of Medicine.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDocumentation of advance care planning for patients with terminal cancer is known to be poor. Here, we describe a quality improvement initiative.

methodsPatients receiving palliative chemotherapy for metastatic lung, pancreatic, colorectal, and breast cancer during 2010-2015 at the Cancer Centre of Southeastern Ontario were identified from electronic pharmacy records. Clinical notes were reviewed to identify documentation of care plans in the event of acute deterioration. After establishing baseline practice, we sought to improve documentation of goals of care and referral rates to palliative care. Using quality improvement methodology, we developed a guideline, a standardized documentation system, and a process to facilitate early referral to palliative care.

resultsDuring 2010-2015, 456 patients were included in the baseline cohort: 63% with lung cancer, 16% with colorectal cancer, 13% with pancreatic cancer, and 7% with breast cancer. Care goals in the event of an acute illness were documented by medical oncologists in 6% of cases (26 of 456). Of the 456 patients, 47% (

conclusionsLow rates of documentation of advance care planning and referral to palliative care persist and have stimulated a local quality improvement initiative.

Indexed as

goals of careMedical oncologypalliative care

Identifiers

PMID29270050
PMCPMC5736480

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.