ArticleBMC palliative care2021
Knowledge of palliative care and preference of end of life care: a cross-sectional survey of residents in the Chinese socio-cultural background of Macao.
Article in BMC palliative care, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Formal caregivers' knowledge, attitudes, and challenges in end-of-life care for people with advanced dementia: a qualitative study in Chinese nursing home.BMC nursing · 2025Article
- Demystifying death: a qualitative study using the behavior change wheel framework to explore the palliative care education experiences of doctors, nurses, and community residents.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Patterns of self-medication and intention to seek pharmacist guidance among older adults during the COVID-19 pandemic in Macao: a cross-sectional study.BMC public health · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSince the establishment of a hospice in the year 2000 and the development of a palliative care ward in 2019, there is no study examining public's knowledge of palliative care, nor preference of end of life care in Macao.
aimTargeting Chinese residents of Macao, the current study has 3 goals: i) to understand the level of knowledge of palliative care, ii) to explore the preference of end of life treatments, and iii) to identify the associated factors of the preference of end of life treatments.
methodsA cross-sectional questionnaire survey was conducted using a structured questionnaire. The study employed non-probability quota sampling through which Macao residents aged 18 and above were recruited between July and September 2020.
resultsA total of 737 responses were valid. The average correct rate of palliative care knowledge ranged from 40.4% to 85.5%. Pertaining to end of life treatments, 62.0% of the respondents chose comfort care. However, almost half of the respondents agreed that life-sustaining treatments should not be stopped under any circumstances. Respondents who scored higher in palliative care knowledge and those with secondary and tertiary education were associated factors of choosing comfort care rather than life-sustaining treatments. In addition, respondents who agreed that futile life-sustaining treatments should be stopped were also associated with preference for comfort care.
conclusionThe understanding of palliative care amongst Macao residents is inadequate. Despite the public's inclination towards comfort care, it is generally believed that life-sustaining treatments should not be stopped at the end of life. The study results suggest that not only the knowledge of palliative care should be enhanced amongst the general public in Macao, but information about life-sustaining treatments should also be offered to patients and families by healthcare professionals, in aiding end of life treatment decision making.
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.