SynthesisThe American journal of hospice & palliative care2019
Control Conditions That Are Neither Usual Care Nor No Treatment in Randomized Trials of Psychoeducational Palliative Care Interventions: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in The American journal of hospice & palliative care, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Impact of BWM-T Versus Brief Mindfulness Induction on Stress, Anxiety and Self-Efficacy in University Students: Immediate and Short-Term Outcomes of RCT on Psychological Well-Being and Autonomic Balance.Brain and behavior · 2026Trial
- Attention control in a trial of an online psychoeducational intervention for caregivers.Research in nursing & health · 2022Trial
- Death preparedness interventions for patients with advanced cancer: A systematic review.Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing · 2025Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
background: Determining intervention efficacy depends as much on the control group as on the intervention, but little attention has been given to the control condition in psychoeducational trials in palliative care.
objectives: To examine (1) research practice regarding control conditions that are neither usual care nor no-treatment controls in randomized trials of psychoeducational palliative care interventions and (2) the rationale and completeness of the descriptions of control conditions in trial reports.
methods: PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and Web of Science were searched. After screening 1603 articles, 70 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility. The final sample included 9 trial reports. We used the Delphi list for quality assessment and the modified intervention taxonomy checklist to assess active intervention and control conditions.
results: Four trials used an attention control designed to be equivalent to the structure of the active intervention. In another 4, the control condition included some aspects of attention control such that the mode of contact was similar to that in the active intervention, but either the amount or the intensity of attention was not similar. Only 3 trial reports explicitly stated the rationale for the choice of control condition. Although most reports contained delivery mode, materials, duration, frequency, and sequence, none described the qualifications or training required to deliver the control condition. Only 1 report mentioned the fidelity monitoring method, and none included fidelity data.
conclusion: Our review of psychoeducational trials in palliative care calls for researchers' attention to appropriate selection, design, conduct and report of control conditions.
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.