Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33355176›Full record

Observational studyBMJ supportive & palliative care2022

Inappropriate end-of-life cancer care in a generalist and specialist palliative care model: a nationwide retrospective population-based observational study.

Manon S Boddaert, Chantal Pereira, Jeroen Adema, Kris C P Vissers, Yvette M van der Linden, Natasja J H Raijmakers, Heidi P Fransen

Open access · hybridAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMJ supportive & palliative care, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

47 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 64 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Potentially inappropriate end-of-life care and its association with relatives' well-being: a systematic review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Manon S BoddaertNetherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL), Utrecht, Netherlands M.Boddaert@iknl.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2158-8221
Chantal PereiraNetherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL), Utrecht, Netherlands.
Jeroen AdemaVektis, Business Intelligence Center for Healthcare, Zeist, Netherlands.
Kris C P VissersDepartment of Anesthesiology, Pain and Palliative Medicine, Radboudumc, Nijmegen, Netherlands.
Yvette M van der LindenCentre of Expertise in Palliative Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands.
Natasja J H RaijmakersNetherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL), Utrecht, Netherlands.
Heidi P FransenNetherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL), Utrecht, Netherlands.
Nederlandse Vereniging voor Kindergeneeskunde · NLLeiden University Medical Center · NLRadboud University Nijmegen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo evaluate the impact of provision and timing of palliative care (PC) on potentially inappropriate end-of-life care to patients with cancer in a mixed generalist-specialist PC model.

methodA retrospective population-based observational study using a national administrative health insurance database. All 43 067 adults in the Netherlands, who were diagnosed with or treated for cancer during the year preceding their death in 2017, were included. Main exposure was either generalist or specialist PC initiated >30 days before death (n=16 967). Outcomes were measured over the last 30 days of life, using quality indicators for potentially inappropriate end-of-life care.

resultsIn total, 14 504 patients (34%) experienced potentially inappropriate end-of-life care; 2732 were provided with PC >30 days before death (exposure group) and 11 772 received no PC or ≤30 days before death (non-exposure group) (16% vs 45%, p<0.001). Most patients received generalist PC (88%). Patients provided with PC >30 days before death were 5 times less likely to experience potentially inappropriate end-of-life care (adjusted OR (AOR) 0.20; (95% CI 0.15 to 0.26)) than those with no PC or PC in the last 30 days. Both early (>90 days) and late (>30 and≤90 days) PC initiation had lower odds for potentially inappropriate end-of-life care (AOR 0.23 and 0.19, respectively).

conclusionTimely access to PC in a mixed generalist-specialist PC model significantly decreases the likelihood of potentially inappropriate end-of-life care for patients with cancer. Generalist PC can play a substantial role.

Indexed as

Hospice CareNeoplasmsTerminal CareAdultDeathHumansPalliative CareRetrospective Studiescancerclinical decisionsend of life carequality of lifesupportive care

Identifiers

PMID33355176
PMCPMC9120402
OpenAlexW3116990679

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.