Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32894787›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Geriatrics Society2021

Deconstructing the Complexities of Advance Care Planning Outcomes: What Do We Know and Where Do We Go? A Scoping Review.

Ryan D McMahan, Ismael Tellez, Rebecca L Sudore

Open access · greenAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 230 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
230citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
40.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

230 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 494 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. [Evidence on Advance Care Planning for People with Dementia - A Systematic Review (2017-2023)].Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany)) · 2026
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Effects of advance care planning on hope, anxiety, attitudes, and behavioral intentions in older adults with cancer: A randomized controlled study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025
    Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Adolescents and young adults with cancer conversations following participation in an advance care planning video pilot.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024
    Trial
  18. Complex advance care planning intervention in general practice (ACP-GP): a cluster-randomised controlled trial.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2024
    Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

170 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ryan D McMahanDivision of Geriatrics, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California.ORCID 0000-0001-5572-0513
Ismael TellezDivision of Geriatrics, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California.
Rebecca L SudoreDivision of Geriatrics, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California.
University of California, San Francisco · US

Funding

VARC CoreP30AG044281 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI W. JOHN BOSCARDIN · 2013 to 2026
$19.9M
Mentoring Researchers in Advance Care Planning for Underrepresented Older Adults at Risk for Alzheimer’s Disease and Related Dementias and Their CaregiversK24AG054415 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI REBECCA L SUDORE · 2017 to 2026
$1.7M
NIA NIH HHS K24 AG054415NIA NIH HHS P30 AG044281
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND/

objectivesAdvance care planning (ACP) has shown benefit in some, but not all, studies. It is important to understand the utility of ACP. We conducted a scoping review to identify promising interventions and outcomes.

designScoping review. MEASUREMENTS: We searched MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Web of Science for ACP randomized controlled trials from January 1, 2010, to March 3, 2020. We used standardized Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses methods to chart study characteristics, including a standardized ACP Outcome Framework: Process (e.g., readiness), Action (e.g., communication), Quality of Care (e.g., satisfaction), Health Status (e.g., anxiety), and Healthcare Utilization. Differences between arms of P < .05 were deemed positive.

resultsOf 1,464 articles, 69 met eligibility; 94% were rated high quality. There were variable definitions, age criteria (≥18 to ≥80 years), diseases (e.g., dementia and cancer), and settings (e.g., outpatient and inpatient). Interventions included facilitated discussions (42%), video only (20%), interactive, multimedia (17%), written only (12%), and clinician training (9%). For written only, 75% of primary outcomes were positive, as were 69% for multimedia programs; 67% for facilitated discussions, 59% for video only, and 57% for clinician training. Overall, 72% of Process and 86% of Action outcomes were positive. For Quality of Care, 88% of outcomes were positive for patient-surrogate/clinician congruence, 100% for patients/surrogate/clinician satisfaction with communication, and 75% for surrogate satisfaction with patients' care, but not for goal concordance. For Health Status outcomes, 100% were positive for reducing surrogate/clinician distress, but not for patient quality of life. Healthcare Utilization data were mixed.

conclusionACP is complex, and trial characteristics were heterogeneous. Outcomes for all ACP interventions were predominantly positive, as were Process and Action outcomes. Although some Quality of Care and Health Status outcomes were mixed, increased patient/surrogate satisfaction with communication and care and decreased surrogate/clinician distress were positive. Further research is needed to appropriately tailor interventions and outcomes for local contexts, set appropriate expectations of ACP outcomes, and standardize across studies.

Indexed as

CommunicationQuality of Health CareAdvance DirectivesHumansPhysician-Patient RelationsRandomized Controlled Trials as Topicadvance care planningadvance directivesscoping review

Identifiers

PMID32894787
PMCPMC7856112
OpenAlexW3084116859

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.