Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35287517›Full record

SynthesisPalliative medicine2022

Civic engagement in serious illness, death, and loss: A systematic mixed-methods review.

Louise D'Eer, Bert Quintiens, Lieve Van den Block, Sarah Dury, Luc Deliens, Kenneth Chambaere, Tinne Smets, Joachim Cohen

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Palliative medicine, 2022. 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. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  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

8 authors.

Louise D'EerEnd-of-life Care Research Group, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB) and Ghent University, Laarbeeklaan, Brussels, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0003-3669-4836
Bert QuintiensEnd-of-life Care Research Group, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB) and Ghent University, Laarbeeklaan, Brussels, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-7029-6466
Lieve Van den BlockEnd-of-life Care Research Group, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB) and Ghent University, Laarbeeklaan, Brussels, Belgium.
Sarah DuryBelgian Ageing Studies Research Group, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Pleinlaan, Brussels, Belgium.
Luc DeliensEnd-of-life Care Research Group, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB) and Ghent University, Laarbeeklaan, Brussels, Belgium.
Kenneth ChambaereEnd-of-life Care Research Group, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB) and Ghent University, Laarbeeklaan, Brussels, Belgium.
Tinne SmetsEnd-of-life Care Research Group, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB) and Ghent University, Laarbeeklaan, Brussels, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0003-1439-316X
Joachim CohenEnd-of-life Care Research Group, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB) and Ghent University, Laarbeeklaan, Brussels, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-7224-9476

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNew public health approaches to palliative care such as compassionate communities aim to increase capacity in serious illness, death, and loss by involving civic society. Civic engagement has been described in many domains of health; a description of the characteristics, processes, and impact of the initiatives in palliative care is lacking.

aimTo systematically describe and compare civic engagement initiatives in palliative care in terms of context, development, impact, and evaluation methods.

designSystematic, mixed-methods review using a convergent integrated synthesis approach. Registered in Prospero: CRD42020180688. DATA SOURCES: Six databases (PubMed, Scopus, Sociological Abstracts, WOS, Embase, PsycINFO) were searched up to November 2021 for publications in English describing civic engagement in serious illness, death, and loss. Additional grey literature was obtained by contacting the first authors. We performed a quality appraisal of the included studies.

resultsWe included 23 peer-reviewed and 11 grey literature publications, reporting on nineteen unique civic engagement initiatives, mostly in countries with English as one of the official languages. Initiatives involved the community in their development, often through a community-academic partnership. Activities aimed to connect people with palliative care needs to individuals or resources in the community. There was a variety of evaluation aims, methods, outcomes, and strength of evidence. Information on whether or how to sustain the initiatives was generally lacking.

conclusionsThis is the first review to systematically describe and compare reported civic engagement initiatives in the domain of palliative care. Future studies would benefit from improved evaluation of impact and sustainability.

Indexed as

Hospice and Palliative Care NursingPalliative CareHumansCivic engagementcommunity developmentcommunity participationcompassionate communitiespalliative carepublic healthsystematic reviewvolunteers

Identifiers

PMID35287517
PMCPMC11910752

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.