Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29587711›Full record

ArticleBMC palliative care2018

A review of paper-based advance care planning aids.

John F P Bridges, Thomas Lynch, Anne L R Schuster, Norah L Crossnohere, Katherine Clegg Smith, Rebecca A Aslakson

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC palliative care, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

6 authors.

John F P BridgesDepartment of Health Policy and Management, The Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Thomas LynchDepartment of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, The Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Anne L R SchusterDepartment of Health Policy and Management, The Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Norah L CrossnohereDepartment of Health, Behavior and Society, The Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA. ncrossn1@jhu.edu.
Katherine Clegg SmithDepartment of Health, Behavior and Society, The Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Rebecca A AslaksonDepartment of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, The Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.

Funding

Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute CD-12-11-4362
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAdvance care planning (ACP) aids can help prepare patients, family members, and physicians for in-the-moment medical decision-making. We wished to describe the content and approach of paper-based ACP aids in order to characterize existing aids and inform the development of a new ACP aid.

methodsPaper-based ACP aids were identified through an environmental scan and screened for eligibility. ACP conceptual frameworks and data were gathered via stakeholder engagement and used to inform the coding framework that two investigators used to independently code each aid. A directed content analysis was conducted on these eligible aids. Aids were categorized through a deliberative process with an investigator abstracting general information for each aid.

resultsFifteen aids met the eligibility criteria. They ranged in length from 6 to 78 pages with the average aid written at an eighth-grade reading level. The content analysis revealed that many aids encouraged choosing a surrogate decision maker and informed users about legal medical documents. Fewer than half of the aids facilitated patient clarification of values regarding quality of life issues. The authors identified and termed the following three categories of aids: informative; semi-action oriented; and action-oriented. It was often unclear whether patients contributed to the development or testing of the ACP aids reviewed.

conclusionsMost existing paper-based ACP aids address legal matters such as completing an advance directive. Only a minority elicited patient values and it was unclear whether any were developed in partnership with patients. Future development of ACP aids should account for patient preferences with a goal of supporting in-the-moment medical decision-making.

Indexed as

Decision MakingPamphletsAdvance Care PlanningAdvance DirectivesHumansPatient-Centered CarePatient PreferenceTerminal CareAdvance care planningDecision aidPatient-centered carePatient decision-making

Identifiers

PMID29587711
PMCPMC5872554

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.