Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35311674›Full record

ArticleJMIR aging2022

Identification of Digital Health Priorities for Palliative Care Research: Modified Delphi Study.

Amara Callistus Nwosu, Tamsin McGlinchey, Justin Sanders, Sarah Stanley, Jennifer Palfrey, Patrick Lubbers, Laura Chapman, Anne Finucane, Stephen Mason

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR aging, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
9.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 72 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Key issues in palliative and supportive care research, policy and practice.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Observational
  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

9 authors at 7 institutions in 3 countries.

Amara Callistus NwosuLancaster Medical School, Lancaster University, Lancaster, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0014-3741
Tamsin McGlincheyPalliative Care Unit, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6245-4225
Justin SandersDana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8928-4051
Sarah StanleyMarie Curie Hospice Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7120-8680
Jennifer PalfreyPrincess Alice Hospice, Surrey, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0550-2467
Patrick LubbersNetherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organization (IKNL), Utrecht, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4846-0148
Laura ChapmanMarie Curie Hospice Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6023-9983
Anne FinucaneClinical Psychology, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3056-059X
Stephen MasonPalliative Care Unit, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4020-6869
Marie Curie Hospice · GBUniversity of Liverpool · GBBrigham and Women's Hospital · USHospice UK · GBNational Health Service · GBNetherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation · NLUniversity of Edinburgh · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDevelopments in digital health have the potential to transform the delivery of health and social care to help citizens manage their health. Currently, there is a lack of consensus about digital health research priorities in palliative care and a lack of theories about how these technologies might improve care outcomes. Therefore, it is important for health care leaders to identify innovations to ensure that an increasingly frail population has appropriate access to palliative care services. Consequently, it is important to articulate research priorities as the first step in determining how finite resources should be allocated to a field saturated with rapidly developing innovation.

objectiveThe aim of this study is to identify research priority areas for digital health in palliative care.

methodsWe selected digital health trends, most relevant to palliative care, from a list of emerging trends reported by a leading institute of quantitative futurists. We conducted 2 rounds of the Delphi questionnaire, followed by a consensus meeting and public engagement workshop to establish a final consensus on research priorities for digital technology in palliative care. We used the views of public representatives to gain their perspectives on the agreed priorities.

resultsA total of 103 experts (representing 11 countries) participated in the first Delphi round. Of the 103 experts, 55 (53.3%) participated in the second round. The final consensus meetings were attended by 10.7% (11/103) of the experts. We identified 16 priority areas, which involved many applications of technologies, including care for patients and caregivers, self-management and reporting of diseases, education and training, communication, care coordination, and research methodology. We summarized the priority areas into eight topics: big data, mobile devices, telehealth and telemedicine, virtual reality, artificial intelligence, smart home, biotechnology, and digital legacy.

conclusionsThe priorities identified in this study represent a wide range of important emerging areas in the fields of digital health, personalized medicine, and data science. Human-centered design and robust governance systems should be considered in future research. It is important that the risks of using these technologies in palliative care are properly addressed to ensure that these tools are used meaningfully, wisely, and safely and do not cause unintentional harm.

Indexed as

digital healthpalliative carequality of lifesupportive caresymptom managementtechnologyterminal care

Identifiers

PMID35311674
PMCPMC9090235
OpenAlexW4205359462

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.