Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29769257›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2018

Optimum hospice at home services for end-of-life care: protocol of a mixed-methods study employing realist evaluation.

Claire Butler, Charlotte Brigden, Heather Gage, Peter Williams, Laura Holdsworth, Kay Greene, Bee Wee, Stephen Barclay, Patricia Wilson

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Hospice at Home services in England: a national survey.BMJ supportive & palliative care · 2021
    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

9 authors.

Claire ButlerCentre for Health Services Studies, University of Kent, Canterbury, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9501-2861
Charlotte BrigdenPilgrims Hospices in East Kent, Canterbury, UK.
Heather GageDepartment of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK.
Peter WilliamsDepartment of Mathematics, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK.
Laura HoldsworthPrimary Care and Population Health, Stanford School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA.
Kay GreeneNational Association for Hospice at Home, Fareham, UK.
Bee WeeNHS England, Wakefield, UK.
Stephen BarclayPrimary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Patricia WilsonCentre for Health Services Studies, University of Kent, Canterbury, UK.

Funding

Department of Health 14/197/44Department of Health HS&DR/14/197/44
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionHospice at home (HAH) services aim to enable patients to be cared for and die in their place of choice, if that is at home, and to achieve a 'good death'. There is a considerable range of HAH services operating in England. The published evidence focuses on evaluations of individual services which vary considerably, and there is a lack of consistency in terms of the outcome measures reported. The evidence, therefore, does not provide generalisable information, so the question 'What are the features of hospice at home service models that work, for whom, and under what circumstances?' remains unanswered. The study aims to answer this question. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a mixed-methods study in three phases informed by realist evaluation methodology. All HAH services in England will be invited to participate in a telephone survey to enable the development of a typology of services. In the second phase, case study sites representing the different service types will collect patient data and recruit carers, service managers and commissioners to gather quantitative and qualitative data about service provision and outcomes. A third phase will synthesise and refine the results through consensus workshops. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The first survey phase has university ethics approval and the second phase, Integrated Research Application System (IRAS) and Health Research Authority (HRA) approval (IRAS ID:205986, REC:17/LO/0880); the third phase does not require ethics approval. Dissemination will be facilitated by project coapplicants with established connections to national policy-making forums, in addition to publications, conference presentations and reports targeted to service providers and commissioners.

Indexed as

EnglandHome Care ServicesHospice CareHumansInterviews as TopicQualitative ResearchRegression AnalysisResearch DesignSurveys and Questionnairesadult palliative carehealth economicsqualitative research

Identifiers

PMID29769257
PMCPMC5961564

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.