Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30071784›Full record

Trial reportThe American journal of hospice & palliative care2018

Family Caregivers' Characterization of Conversations Following an ACP Event.

Jane R Schubart, Jean M Reading, Janice Penrod, Renee R Stewart, Ramya Sampath, Lisa S Lehmann, Benjamin H Levi, Michael J Green

Abstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in The American journal of hospice & palliative care, 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
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
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, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Jane R SchubartDepartment of Surgery, The Pennsylvania State University College of Medicine, Hershey, PA, USA.
Jean M ReadingDepartment of Health Behavior and Policy, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, Richmond, VA, USA.
Janice PenrodCollege of Nursing, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA.
Renee R StewartDepartment of Humanities, The Pennsylvania State University College of Medicine, Hershey, PA, USA.
Ramya SampathDepartment of General Internal Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Lisa S LehmannDepartment of General Internal Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Benjamin H LeviDepartment of Humanities, The Pennsylvania State University College of Medicine, Hershey, PA, USA.
Michael J GreenDepartment of Medicine, The Pennsylvania State University College of Medicine, Hershey, PA, USA.
Pennsylvania State University · USBrigham and Women's Hospital · USOffice of Patient Care Services · USVirginia Commonwealth University · US

Funding

Preparing Family Caregivers of Very Ill Patients for End-of-Life Decision MakingR01NR012757 · NINR · PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV HERSHEY MED CTR · PI GREEN, MICHAEL J., LEVI, BENJAMIN H. · 2012 to 2019
$4.0M
NINR NIH HHS R01 NR012757
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAdvance care planning (ACP) has been shown to benefit patients and families, yet little is known about how an ACP event impacts communication and conversation about end-of-life treatment wishes and the content of such conversations between patients and family caregivers.

objectiveTo characterize post-ACP conversations regarding medical wishes between seriously ill patients and their family caregivers.

participantsPatients with advanced illness and family caregivers. OUTCOME MEASURED: Post-ACP conversations.

designAs part of a larger randomized controlled trial, dyads consisting of seriously ill patients and their identified family caregiver engaged in ACP and created an advance directive for the patient. Approximately 4 to 6 weeks later, semistructured interviews were conducted with the family caregivers to elucidate the subsequent communications regarding medical wishes. If the dyad did not have any conversations post-ACP, reasons and barriers were explored.

resultsThe majority of dyads (131/188, 69.7%) had 2 to 3 conversations lasting 3 to 5 minutes each in the weeks immediately following ACP. These conversations most commonly addressed general patient wishes about quality of life and specific medical treatments. The most common reasons for not having conversations were a general discomfort with the topic (13/57, 22.8%) and previously having discussed medical wishes (16/57, 28.1%).

conclusionThe ACP events promote conversation regarding quality of life, general wishes at the end of life, and specific medical wishes. Barriers to conversation following ACP were similar to barriers to ACP in general, suggesting that a more intentional focus on addressing these barriers pre- and post-ACP may be necessary to improve communication.

Indexed as

CommunicationTerminal CareAdultAdvance Care PlanningAgedCaregiversDecision Support TechniquesFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedPatient PreferencePatientsQuality of LifeUnited Statesadvance care planningdecision aidsend-of-life treatment

Identifiers

PMID30071784
PMCPMC6092939
OpenAlexW2886044641

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.