Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32667259›Full record

SynthesisPalliative medicine2020

Complementary therapy in palliative care: A synthesis of qualitative and quantitative systematic reviews.

Megan Armstrong, Nuriye Kupeli, Kate Flemming, Patrick Stone, Susie Wilkinson, Bridget Candy

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Palliative medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Music therapy for end-of-life care.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. 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

6 authors.

Megan ArmstrongMarie Curie Palliative Care Research Department, Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6773-9393
Nuriye KupeliMarie Curie Palliative Care Research Department, Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6511-412X
Kate FlemmingDepartment of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0795-8516
Patrick StoneMarie Curie Palliative Care Research Department, Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK.
Susie WilkinsonPalliative Care Institute, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Bridget CandyMarie Curie Palliative Care Research Department, Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9935-7840

Funding

Marie Curie MCCC-FCH-18-UMarie Curie MCCC-FCO-11-UMarie Curie MCRGS-07-16-36
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInterventions delivered in palliative care are complex and their evaluation through qualitative and quantitative research can lead to contrasting results. In a systematic review of trials, the effectiveness results of complementary therapies in palliative care were inconclusive; however, our qualitative synthesis showed participants perceived them to be beneficial.

aimUse a novel methodology to synthesise evidence from qualitative and quantitative systematic reviews on complementary therapy in palliative care to explore the following: (1) If interventions delivered in trials reflect how participants in qualitative studies report they are delivered in real-life settings and (2) whether quality of life measures used in trials capture perceived benefits that are reported in qualitative studies.

methodsTwo matrix tables were formulated. In one, key components in delivery of the complementary therapy from the qualitative synthesis which are as follows: (1) relationship with therapist, (2) comfortable environment, (3) choices (e.g. area of massage) and (4) frequent sessions, were plotted against intervention description, to explore matches and mismatches. In the other, items included in quality of life scales were compared with perceived benefits of complementary therapy.

resultsNone of the trials included all four key delivery components. The five quality of life scales used in the trials failed to capture the range of perceived benefits from the complementary therapies and many included inappropriate or redundant items.

conclusionsBy integrating qualitative and quantitative review data, we determined the reasons trials may be inconclusive. This methodological exemplar provides a framework for understanding complexity in outcomes across trials and a direction for future research.

Indexed as

Hospice and Palliative Care NursingPalliative CareHumansMassageQualitative ResearchQuality of LifearomatherapyComplementary therapymassagepalliativequality of lifereflexologysynthesissystematic review

Identifiers

PMID32667259
PMCPMC7543001

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.