SynthesisBMC palliative care2020
Are the MORECare guidelines on reporting of attrition in palliative care research populations appropriate? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
Synthesis in BMC palliative care, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 4 of them syntheses 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
23 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Palliative care interventions for thoracic cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis identifying the core elements.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2026Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Needs-based triggers for timely referral to palliative care for older adults severely affected by noncancer conditions: a systematic review and narrative synthesis.BMC palliative care · 2023Pooled it
- Systematic review and meta analysis of differential attrition between active and control arms in randomized controlled trials of lifestyle interventions in chronic disease.BMC medical research methodology · 2021Pooled it
- Trial
- Feasibility of a digital palliative care intervention (Convoy-Pal) for older adults with heart failure and multiple chronic conditions and their caregivers: a waitlist randomized control trial.BMC palliative care · 2024Trial
- Feasibility and acceptability of a nurse-led telehealth intervention (BOLSTER) to support patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis and their caregivers: A pilot randomized clinical trial.Gynecologic oncology · 2024Trial
- Meaning-centered pain coping skills training for patients with metastatic cancer: Results of a randomized controlled pilot trial.Psycho-oncology · 2023Trial
- Multidisciplinary Palliative Care and Its Impact on Symptom Burden and Quality of Life in Advanced Cancer Patients in Ethiopia: A Pre-Post Quasi-Experimental Study.Cancer management and research · 2026Article
- Exploring the Impact of a Remote Monitoring System for Palliative and End-of-Life Care (CARE-PAC): Mixed Methods Feasibility Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- From MINI to Meaningful Change-A German Pilot Study to Improve Patient Outcomes in End-of-Life Care.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Improving specialist palliative care discharges from hospitals and hospices to community settings: a qualitative interview study of the communication experiences of patients, carers, and primary care professionals.BMC palliative care · 2025Article
- Cancer cachexia: A scoping review on non-pharmacological interventions.Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing · 2024Article
- Health care professional recruitment of patients and family carers to palliative care randomised controlled trials: A qualitative multiple case study.Palliative medicine · 2023Article
- A randomised, controlled, feasibility trial of an online, self-guided breathlessness supportive intervention (SELF-BREATHE) for individuals with chronic breathlessness due to advanced disease.ERJ open research · 2023Article
- Study retention and attrition in a longitudinal cohort study including patient-reported outcomes, fieldwork and biobank samples: results of the Netherlands quality of life and Biomedical cohort study (NET-QUBIC) among 739 head and neck cancer patients and 262 informal caregivers.BMC medical research methodology · 2022Article
- Development of guidelines to reduce, handle and report missing data in palliative care trials: A multi-stakeholder modified nominal group technique.Palliative medicine · 2022Article
- Interim Analysis of Attrition Rates in Palliative Care Study on Dignity Therapy.The American journal of hospice & palliative care · 2021Article
- Successful Strategies and Areas of Improvement-Lessons Learned from Design and Conduction of a Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial in Palliative Care, 'Palliative-D'.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- "It Can Be Hard But It's Not Bad": Three Questions to Solicit Caregiver Perceptions of Benefits and Burdens to Participating in Pediatric Palliative Care Research.Journal of palliative medicine · 2021Article
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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPalliative care trials have higher rates of attrition. The MORECare guidance recommends applying classifications of attrition to report attrition to help interpret trial results. The guidance separates attrition into three categories: attrition due to death, illness or at random. The aim of our study is to apply the MORECare classifications on reported attrition rates in trials.
methodsA systematic review was conducted and attrition classifications retrospectively applied. Four databases, EMBASE; Medline, CINHAL and PsychINFO, were searched for randomised controlled trials of palliative care populations from 01.01.2010 to 08.10.2016. This systematic review is part of a larger review looking at recruitment to randomised controlled trials in palliative care, from January 1990 to early October 2016. We ran random-effect models with and without moderators and descriptive statistics to calculate rates of missing data.
resultsOne hundred nineteen trials showed a total attrition of 29% (95% CI 28 to 30%). We applied the MORECare classifications of attrition to the 91 papers that contained sufficient information. The main reason for attrition was attrition due to death with a weighted mean of 31.6% (SD 27.4) of attrition cases. Attrition due to illness was cited as the reason for 17.6% (SD 24.5) of participants. In 50.8% (SD 26.5) of cases, the attrition was at random. We did not observe significant differences in missing data between total attrition in non-cancer patients (26%; 95% CI 18-34%) and cancer patients (24%; 95% CI 20-29%). There was significantly more missing data in outpatients (29%; 95% CI 22-36%) than inpatients (16%; 95% CI 10-23%). We noted increased attrition in trials with longer durations.
conclusionReporting the cause of attrition is useful in helping to understand trial results. Prospective reporting using the MORECare classifications should improve our understanding of future trials.
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.