Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35715185›Full record

SynthesisBMJ open2022

Addressing palliative care and end-of-life issues in patients with advanced cancer: a systematic review of communication interventions for physicians not specialised in palliative care.

Nele Harnischfeger, Hilke M Rath, Karin Oechsle, Corinna Bergelt

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.2field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

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

  1. Early and simultaneous palliative care in cancer patients: an overview.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Novel Systemic Anticancer Treatments and Health Services Use at the End of Life Among Adults With Cancer.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Patients' palliative care needs in rural health and a proposal for palliation services.African journal of primary health care & family medicine · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Nele HarnischfegerPalliative Care Unit, Department of Oncology, Hematology and BMT, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany n.harnischfeger@uke.de.ORCID 0000-0001-9121-8782
Hilke M RathDepartment of Medical Psychology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Karin OechslePalliative Care Unit, Department of Oncology, Hematology and BMT, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Corinna BergeltDepartment of Medical Psychology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Universität Hamburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo identify and summarise evaluated interventions aiming to improve the communication of palliative care (PC) and end-of-life (EoL) issues in physicians caring for cancer patients. Such interventions are needed with regard to the aim of an earlier communication of those issues in oncology daily practice, which is associated with a range of benefits for patients and caregivers but is often impeded by physicians' communication insecurities.

designSystematic review based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. DATA SOURCES: Relevant publications were systematically searched in MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Web of Science databases in September 2020 with an update in July 2021. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included publications reporting a quantitative evaluation of a communication intervention on one or more PC/EoL issues with a communication-related main outcome. Target group had to be physicians caring for cancer patients non-specialist in PC. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two independent raters extracted intervention characteristics, publication characteristics and publication quality. Results were narratively synthesised.

results24 publications reporting 22 interventions were included. 13 publications reported randomised controlled trials. A majority of the interventions addressed one specific PC/EoL issue, most often breaking bad news. Teaching strategies mostly involved role-plays. Target group were mainly oncologists. In addition to self-reported outcome measurements for evaluation, most publications also reported the use of external rating data. All but one publication reported significant intervention effects on at least one outcome parameter. Publication quality was overall moderate.

conclusionsThe empirically tested communication interventions on PC/EoL issues seem to effectively improve physicians' communication. Future interventions should focus on other issues than breaking bad news, such as preparing for the future. Target group should also be organ-specific oncologists, as all primary caring physicians are responsible for timely communication. Our risk-of-bias assessment revealed some weaknesses, indicating that more high-quality studies for evaluation are needed. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020191054.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsPhysiciansCommunicationDeathHumansPalliative Caremedical education & trainingoncologypalliative care

Identifiers

PMID35715185
PMCPMC9207918
OpenAlexW4283011321

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.