Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34647028›Full record

ReviewPalliative care and social practice2021

New public health approaches to palliative care, a brave new horizon or an impractical ideal? An Integrative literature review with thematic synthesis.

Joseph M Sawyer, Paul Higgs, John D H Porter, Elizabeth L Sampson

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Palliative care and social practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing 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

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Connecting communities across the globe: Atlas protocol.Palliative care and social practice · 2025
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Palliative care - too complex to make it simple.Croatian medical journal · 2024
    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

4 authors.

Joseph M SawyerDivision of Psychiatry, University College London (UCL), 6th Floor, Wing B, Maple House, 149 Tottenham Court Road, London W1T 7NF, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7931-9967
Paul HiggsDivision of Psychiatry, University College London (UCL), London, UK.
John D H PorterLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Elizabeth L SampsonDivision of Psychiatry, University College London (UCL), London, UK.

Funding

Marie Curie MCCC-FCO-11-U
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Access to palliative care for marginalized communities is frequently problematized as a major challenge facing palliative care services. The traditional response of asking what services can do for the disadvantaged has been invigorated by a new wave of public health measures that embrace death and dying as social processes and ask, what can be done together with such communities as partners working in palliative care. Such work has generated a significant amount of academic, social and political interests over the last 20 years; however, we are yet to see a consistent and sustained change in approach from providers. We argue that this is due to inherent tensions that arise when modelling death, dying and loss as a unified and shared social process. Unresolved tensions destabilize the theoretical foundations and risk misrepresentation of core philosophies. In this integrative review of 75 articles, we present previously undiscussed areas of contention drawing from a pan-disciplinary field of theoretical and empirical evidence. We conclude that new public health approaches lack a consistent and unified theoretical approach. From philosophical, ontological and existential ideas relating to how different stakeholders conceptualize death, to the processes by which communities are motivated and their constituent members empowered through responsibilized notions of duty and reciprocity, there is little acknowledgement of the complex tensions at hand. Increasing academic and political initiative alone is not enough to progress this movement in a manner that achieves its full potential. Instead, we must pay greater attention to the tensions described. This article aims to work with such tensions to better define the landscape of collective moral responsibility in end-of-life care. We believe that this is crucial if palliative care is to avoid becoming a technical speciality with community and communitization reduced to a mere technical solution to more profound questions.

Indexed as

communityhealth promotionpalliative carepublic healthsocial capitalsocial determinants of health

Identifiers

PMID34647028
PMCPMC8504281

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.