Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32748015›Full record

ReviewHeart failure reviews2021

Palliative care needs-assessment and measurement tools used in patients with heart failure: a systematic mixed-studies review with narrative synthesis.

Bader Nael Remawi, Amy Gadoud, Iain Malcolm James Murphy, Nancy Preston

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Heart failure reviews, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.1field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 59 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Palliative Care in Advanced Heart Failure.Current heart failure reports · 2026
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Bader Nael RemawiLancaster Medical School, Faculty of Health and Medicine, Lancaster University, Lancaster, LA1 4YG, UK. b.remawi@lancaster.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-3208-4419
Amy GadoudLancaster Medical School, Faculty of Health and Medicine, Lancaster University, Lancaster, LA1 4YG, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6351-1535
Iain Malcolm James MurphyLancaster Medical School, Faculty of Health and Medicine, Lancaster University, Lancaster, LA1 4YG, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7151-1735
Nancy PrestonInternational Observatory on End of Life Care, Faculty of Health and Medicine, Lancaster University, Lancaster, LA1 4YG, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2659-2342
Lancaster University · GBTrinity House · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Patients with heart failure have comparable illness burden and palliative care needs to those with cancer. However, few of them are offered timely palliative care. One main barrier is the difficulty in identifying those who require palliative care. Several palliative care needs-assessment/measurement tools were used to help identify these patients and assess/measure their needs, but it is not known which one is the most appropriate for this population. This review aimed to identify the most appropriate palliative care needs-assessment/measurement tools for patients with heart failure. Cochrane Library, MEDLINE Complete, AMED, PsycINFO, CINAHL Complete, EMBASE, EThOS, websites of the identified tools, and references and citations of the included studies were searched from inception to 25 June 2020. Studies were included if they evaluated palliative care needs-assessment/measurement tools for heart failure populations in terms of development, psychometrics, or palliative care patient/needs identification. Twenty-seven papers were included regarding nineteen studies, most of which were quantitative and observational. Six tools were identified and compared according to their content and context of use, development, psychometrics, and clinical applications in identifying patients with palliative care needs. Despite limited evidence, the Needs Assessment Tool: Progressive Disease - Heart Failure (NAT:PD-HF) is the most appropriate palliative care needs-assessment tool for use in heart failure populations. It covers most of the patient needs and has the best psychometric properties and evidence of identification ability and appropriateness. Psychometric testing of the tools in patients with heart failure and evaluating the tools to identify those with palliative care needs require more investigation.

Indexed as

Heart FailureHospice and Palliative Care NursingHumansNeeds AssessmentPalliative CarePsychometricsHeart failureMixed-studies reviewNarrative synthesisNeeds-assessmentNeeds-measurementPalliative careSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID32748015
PMCPMC7769784
OpenAlexW3047499127

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.