ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2019
Correction to: Priorities of a "good death" according to cancer patients, their family caregivers, physicians, and the general population: a nationwide survey.
Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Factors related to good death from the perspectives of informal caregivers of cancer patients: a systematic review.BMC palliative care · 2025Pooled it
- Translation and psychometric validation of the Persian Care Evaluation Scale-2 short version in bereaved family members of cancer patients.Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing · 2025Article
- My virtual home: needs of patients in palliative cancer care and content effects of individualized virtual reality - a mixed methods study protocol.BMC palliative care · 2023Article
- Factors associated with suffering from dying in patients with cancer: a cross-sectional analytical study among bereaved caregivers.BMC palliative care · 2023Article
- Exploring Web-Based Twitter Conversations Surrounding National Healthcare Decisions Day and Advance Care Planning From a Sociocultural Perspective: Computational Mixed Methods Analysis.JMIR formative research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum for
Authors and funding
21 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
While recently extending that research, however, we discovered that 236 members of the general population were mistakenly duplicated by the investigating agency (Word Research) and 1241 were reported rather than 1005. Here, we present corrections and discuss the relevant data.
Identifiers
31309297What 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.