Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31835998›Full record

SynthesisBMC palliative care2019

Telehealth in palliative care is being described but not evaluated: a systematic review.

Sophie Hancock, Nancy Preston, Helen Jones, Amy Gadoud

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC palliative care, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 69 papers, 11 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
69citing papers in PubMed, 11 pooled it
–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

69 citing papers in PubMed, 11 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Role of Digital Health on Palliative Care: Umbrella Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. The experiences and needs of metastatic spinal cancer family caregivers at home: a systematic review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2023
    Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

9 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

4 authors.

Sophie HancockInternational Observatory on End of Life Care, Furness Building, Lancaster University, Lancaster, LA1 4YG, UK. sophie.hancock@doctors.org.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0897-899X
Nancy PrestonInternational Observatory on End of Life Care, Furness Building, Lancaster University, Lancaster, LA1 4YG, UK.
Helen JonesSt Catherine's Hospice, Lostock Hall, Lostock Lane, Preston, PR5 5XU, UK.
Amy GadoudInternational Observatory on End of Life Care, Furness Building, Lancaster University, Lancaster, LA1 4YG, UK.

Funding

NIHR ACF n/a
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTelehealth is growing and its application in palliative care is seen as a solution to pressures on palliative care services. A 2010 UK review reported growing awareness of telehealth in palliative care but a lack of evidence-based research to support its use. The primary aim of this review was to describe the current use of telehealth in palliative care in the UK and evaluate telehealth initiatives against a digital service standard. The secondary aim was to explore whether telehealth results in a reduction in emergency care access.

methodsSystematic review of the literature with thematic synthesis. Records were screened and data extracted by two reviewers. EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Psychinfo and Cochrane central register for controlled trials were searched using pre-defined terms. Hand searching of conference literature, thesis databases and citation tracking was also conducted. The protocol for this systematic review was registered with PROSPERO and can be found at http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?ID=CRD42017080038.

resultsThe search identified 3807 titles and 30 studies were included in the review. Telehealth was used to support patients and carers, electronic record keeping and professional education. Notably, the number of home telemonitoring initiatives for patients had increased from the 2010 review. Despite this variety, many studies were small scale, descriptive and provided little evidence of evaluation of the service. Ten papers were sufficiently detailed to allow appraisal against the digital service standard and only one of these met all of the criteria to some extent. Seven studies made reference to emergency care access.

conclusionsAlthough there is growth of telehealth services, there remains a lack of evaluation and robust study design meaning conclusions regarding the clinical application of telehealth in palliative care cannot be drawn. There is insufficient evidence to appreciate any benefit of telehealth on access to emergency care. Future work is needed to evaluate the use of telehealth in palliative care and improve telehealth design in line with digital service standards.

Indexed as

HumansPalliative CareProgram EvaluationState MedicineTelemedicineUnited KingdomPalliative careSystematic ReviewTelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID31835998
PMCPMC6911274

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.