ArticleScientific reports2022
End-of-life discussions reduce the utilization of life-sustaining treatments during the last three months of life in cancer patients.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of Clinicians' Empathetic Communication on Anxiety: A Randomized Video Vignette Study.Journal of general and family medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- End-of-Life Care Preferences of Terminally Ill Patients: A Cross-Sectional Study.Indian journal of palliative careArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Studies to examine the impact of end-of-life (EOL) discussions on the utilization of life-sustaining treatments near death are limited and have inconsistent findings. This nationwide population-based cohort study determined the impact of EOL discussions on the utilization of life-sustaining treatments in the last three months of life in Taiwanese cancer patients. From 2012 to 2018, this cohort study included adult cancer patients, which were confirmed by pathohistological reports. Life-sustaining treatments during the last three months of life included cardiopulmonary resuscitation, intubation, and defibrillation. EOL discussions in cancer patients were confirmed by their medical records. Association of EOL discussions with utilization of life-sustaining treatments were assessed using multiple logistic regression. Of 381,207 patients, the mean age was 70.5 years and 19.4% of the subjects received life-sustaining treatments during the last three months of life. After adjusting for other covariates, those who underwent EOL discussions were less likely to receive life-sustaining treatments during the last three months of life compared to those who did not (Adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.85-0.89). Considering the type of treatments, EOL discussions correlated with a lower likelihood of receiving cardiopulmonary resuscitation (AOR = 0.45, 95% CI 0.43-0.47), endotracheal intubation (AOR = 0.92, 95%CI 0.90-0.95), and defibrillation (AOR = 0.54, 95%CI 0.49-0.59). Since EOL discussions are associated with less aggressive care, our study supports the importance of providing these discussions to cancer patients during the EOL treatment.
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.