Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33791505›Full record

ArticleFuture healthcare journal2021

Recognising the elephant in the room: Foundation doctors and anticipatory care planning.

Helen Chapman, Miriam Jassam, Rebecca O'Rourke, Rebecca Anthony

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Future healthcare journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Helen ChapmanUniversity of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Miriam JassamUniversity of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Rebecca O'RourkeUniversity of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Rebecca AnthonyThe Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Anticipatory/advance care planning (ACP) conversations are often known to be challenging and should be undertaken sensitively. A qualitative service evaluation was undertaken with the elderly care department at The Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust by medical students to explore the thoughts and experiences of foundation doctors. ACP discussions include consideration of future treatment options and preferences; however, foundation doctors were not confident to discuss issues beyond resuscitation status. The key themes identified include understanding of and confidence in ACP, variation across specialty and medical educational needs. The analysis highlights a further need for qualitative research into prevalent attitudes towards ACP discussions across the range of specialties.

Indexed as

anticipatory care planningDNACPRjunior doctorsmedical education

Identifiers

PMID33791505
PMCPMC8004347

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.