Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35493625›Full record

ArticleFrontline gastroenterology2022

Do screening tools assess palliative care needs and 12-month mortality in patients admitted to hepatology in-patient wards?

Joseph Low, Catherine Carroll, Jo Wilson, Rachel Craig, Shree Vadera, Sara Cococcia, Douglas Thorburn, Patrick Stone, Aileen Marshall, Victoria Vickerstaff

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontline gastroenterology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

10 authors.

Joseph LowMarie Curie Palliative Care Research Department, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1499-5216
Catherine CarrollPalliative Care, Royal Free London NHS Trust, London, UK.
Jo WilsonPalliative Care, Royal Free London NHS Trust, London, UK.
Rachel CraigPalliative Care, Royal Free London NHS Trust, London, UK.
Shree VaderaDepartment of Hepatology, Royal Free London NHS Trust, London, UK.
Sara CococciaDepartment of Hepatology, Royal Free London NHS Trust, London, UK.
Douglas ThorburnDepartment of Hepatology, Royal Free London NHS Trust, London, UK.
Patrick StoneMarie Curie Palliative Care Research Department, University College London, London, UK.
Aileen MarshallDepartment of Hepatology, Royal Free London NHS Trust, London, UK.
Victoria VickerstaffMarie Curie Palliative Care Research Department, University College London, London, UK.

Funding

Marie Curie MCCC-FCH-18-UMarie Curie MCCC-FCO-11-UMarie Curie MCCC-FCO-16-UMarie Curie MCCC-FPO-16-U
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Many liver patients have unmet palliative care needs, but liver clinicians are unclear whom to refer to specialist palliative care (SPC). The Supportive and Palliative Care Indicator Tool (SPICT) and the Bristol Prognostic Screening Tool (BPST) could help identify suitable patients, but neither has been tested for this role. This study evaluated their role as screening tools for palliative care needs and for predicting 12-month mortality. Methods: A case note review of hepatology in-patients, who were not peritransplant and post-transplant status, was conducted in one tertiary unit. Main outcomes were clinical judgement of need for SPC referral, BPST scores, SPICT attribution of caseness and 12-month survival status. Discriminatory ability of tools was assessed using sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve. Results: 117 medical notes were reviewed for survival analysis, 47 of which were additionally assessed for suitability for SPC referral, using clinical judgement. SPICT (sensitivity=93%; PPV=93%; AUROC=0.933) and BPST (sensitivity=59%, PPV=79%, AUROC=0.693) demonstrated excellent and good performance, respectively, in predicting patients' need for SPC referral. SPICT and BPST only had moderate ability at predicting death at 12 months (PPV: 54% and 56%, respectively). Conclusion: SPICT and BPST show potential as screening tools for identifying patients for referral to SPC. Further work is needed to determine how to implement these tools in a clinical setting.

Indexed as

chronic liver diseasecirrhosishealth service researchscreening

Identifiers

PMID35493625
PMCPMC8996104

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.