ArticleIrish journal of medical science2022
General practitioners' views of advance care planning: a questionnaire-based study.
Article in Irish journal of medical science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patient perceptions of advance care planning within primary care: a systematic review of facilitators and barriers.BMC primary care · 2025Pooled it
- Proxy, nurse, and physician needs regarding advance care planning by proxy for aged care residents lacking decision making capacity: an exploratory study.BMC geriatrics · 2025Article
- GPs' perceptions of pharmacists working in general practices: A mixed methods survey study.The European journal of general practice · 2023Article
- The development of a questionnaire to assess the willingness of Chinese community health workers to implement advance care planning.BMC palliative care · 2022Article
- Advancing Person-Centred Care Through Palliative Care WA's ACP Workshops: The Longer-Term Impact.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPlanning for end of life (EOL) care has become an important consideration for doctors and patients in the context of longer life expectancy in most high-income countries. Advance care plans (ACPs) allow individuals to make plans for future healthcare practices for when they no longer have the capacity to make such decisions. It has been suggested that general practitioners (GPs) have the ideal relationship with patients to facilitate this process. However, the uptake of ACPs still remains low, prompting the need to understand the views of GPs regarding ACPs.
aimThe aim of this study was to assess the knowledge and attitudes of GPs regarding ACPs and to identify barriers in implementing ACPs into practice. DESIGN AND
settingA cross-sectional descriptive study was conducted with GPs in county Cork and Kerry.
methodsA questionnaire was adapted from two previously published studies, piloted and posted to GPs. Two hundred thirty-seven questionnaires were posted.
resultsSeventy-five questionnaires were completed, representing a 31.7% response rate. Findings revealed that GPs have positive attitudes towards ACPS, although there is an inadequate understanding of ACPs. In particular, GPs are challenged by defining the right moment to initiate EOL discussions, their patients' unawareness of ACPs, and lack of time during consultations.
conclusionIn order to improve their implementation, workshops and courses should be developed to increase GPs' knowledge and confidence. Additionally, the healthcare system should be adapted, supporting GPs to facilitate these important discussions to take place.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.