ArticleJournal of palliative medicine2019
Update in Hospice and Palliative Care.
Article in Journal of palliative medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe objective of this update, presented at the 2018 Annual Assembly of the American Association of Hospice and Palliative Medicine (AAHPM) and the Hospice and Palliative Nurses Association (HPNA), is to identify, summarize, and critique a sampling of recent research that has the potential for marked impact on hospice and palliative clinical practice.
methodsIn a departure from previous years, we surveyed AAHPM and HPNA members to determine focused topic areas, from which we selected candidate articles. The two topic areas selected by the membership were "Moving into the great beyond: bringing palliative care into the subspecialties" and "Improving the conversation for patients with serious illness." Seven reports of original research published between January 1, 2012 and November 3, 2017 were identified through a systematic search of relevant databases, hand searching of leading journals, and discussion with experts in the field. Candidate articles were scored and ranked independently by four reviewers based on methodological quality, appeal to a breadth of palliative care clinicians across settings, and potential for impact.
resultsWe summarize the seven articles with the highest ratings.
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.