Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32164642›Full record

ArticleBMC palliative care2020

Coping and wellbeing in bereavement: two core outcomes for evaluating bereavement support in palliative care.

Emily Harrop, Hannah Scott, Stephanie Sivell, Kathy Seddon, Jim Fitzgibbon, Fiona Morgan, Sara Pickett, Anthony Byrne, Annmarie Nelson, Mirella Longo

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article 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 27 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 62 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Support for parents and families after stillbirth and neonatal death.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Emily HarropMarie Curie Research Centre, Division of Population Medicine, Cardiff University, 8th Floor Neuadd Meirionydd, Heath Park Way, Cardiff, CF14 4YS, UK. harrope@cardiff.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2820-0023
Hannah ScottSchool of Dentistry, Cardiff University, University Hospital Wales, Heath Park, Cardiff, CF14 4XY, UK.
Stephanie SivellMarie Curie Research Centre, Division of Population Medicine, Cardiff University, 8th Floor Neuadd Meirionydd, Heath Park Way, Cardiff, CF14 4YS, UK.
Kathy SeddonMarie Curie Research Centre, Division of Population Medicine, Cardiff University, 8th Floor Neuadd Meirionydd, Heath Park Way, Cardiff, CF14 4YS, UK.
Jim FitzgibbonMarie Curie Research Centre, Division of Population Medicine, Cardiff University, 8th Floor Neuadd Meirionydd, Heath Park Way, Cardiff, CF14 4YS, UK.
Fiona MorganMarie Curie Research Centre, Division of Population Medicine, Cardiff University, 8th Floor Neuadd Meirionydd, Heath Park Way, Cardiff, CF14 4YS, UK.
Sara PickettSwansea Centre for Health Economics, Swansea University, Singleton Park, Swansea, SA2 8PP, UK.
Anthony ByrneMarie Curie Research Centre, Division of Population Medicine, Cardiff University, 8th Floor Neuadd Meirionydd, Heath Park Way, Cardiff, CF14 4YS, UK.
Annmarie NelsonMarie Curie Research Centre, Division of Population Medicine, Cardiff University, 8th Floor Neuadd Meirionydd, Heath Park Way, Cardiff, CF14 4YS, UK.
Mirella LongoMarie Curie Research Centre, Division of Population Medicine, Cardiff University, 8th Floor Neuadd Meirionydd, Heath Park Way, Cardiff, CF14 4YS, UK.
Marie Curie · GBSwansea University · GBUniversity Hospital of Wales · GB

Funding

Marie Curie C55837/A20999Marie Curie MCCC-FCO-11-CMarie Curie MCCC-RP-16-A20999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBereavement support is a core part of palliative care. However, the evidence base is limited by a lack of consistency in the outcomes used to evaluate services and models of support, which makes it difficult to compare approaches. Core Outcome Sets (COS) represent the minimum that should be measured in research into specific conditions or services. The aim of this study was to use a stakeholders' perspective to develop a COS for evaluating bereavement support for adults in adult palliative care settings.

methodsA list of outcomes relevant to bereavement support was created following a systematic review of the quantitative and qualitative literature. At an expert workshop 21 stakeholders discussed their views on the most important outcomes and compared these to and critiqued the lists constructed from the review. These lists and discussions informed a two round international DELPHI survey (n = 240) designed to reach consensus on which outcomes/outcome dimensions should be included in the COS. To prioritise and validate the items emerging from the survey, participants at a subsequent consensus day ranked the relative importance of these items (n = 23). A final feedback exercise with these consensus day participants was conducted to confirm the selection of outcomes and dimensions.

results'Ability to cope with grief' and 'Quality of life and mental wellbeing' were selected as two core outcomes. Twenty-one different dimensions to explore when assessing these outcomes were also identified. The coping related dimensions have been categorised as: Negative and overwhelming grief; Communication and connectedness; Understanding, accepting and finding meaning in grief; Finding balance between grief and life going forwards; Accessing appropriate support. Those relating to quality of life and wellbeing have been categorised as; Participation in work and/or regular activities; Relationships and social functioning; Positive mental wellbeing and Negative mental and emotional state.

conclusionThis COS outlines a more consistent way forward for bereavement researchers and practitioners, whilst also orientating towards public health and resilience-based approaches to bereavement care. Further work is planned to identify and develop measures which are specific to this core outcome set, and which will facilitate the future comparability of bereavement services and interventions.

Indexed as

Adaptation, PsychologicalAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBereavementDelphi TechniqueFemaleHospice CareHumansMaleMiddle AgedPalliative CareQuality of LifeSurveys and QuestionnairesBereavementCore outcome setDelphi surveyPalliative care

Identifiers

PMID32164642
PMCPMC7068975
OpenAlexW3012554782

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.