Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36071641›Full record

SynthesisPalliative medicine2022

How best to capture the impact of complementary therapies in palliative care: A systematic review to identify and assess the appropriateness and validity of multi-domain tools.

Lucy Mitchinson, Christina Chu, Andrea Bruun, Ali-Rose Sisk, Megan Armstrong, Cecilia Vindrola-Padros, Nuriye Kupeli, Bridget Candy, Patrick Stone

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
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. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 85% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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 1 institution in 1 country.

Lucy MitchinsonMarie Curie Palliative Care Research Department, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3648-2913
Christina ChuMarie Curie Palliative Care Research Department, University College London, London, UK.
Andrea BruunMarie Curie Palliative Care Research Department, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9620-0290
Ali-Rose SiskMarie Curie Palliative Care Research Department, University College London, London, UK.
Megan ArmstrongPrimary Care and Population Health, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6773-9393
Cecilia Vindrola-PadrosDepartment of Targeted Intervention and Rapid Research, Evaluation and Appraisal Lab (RREAL), University College London, London, UK.
Nuriye KupeliMarie Curie Palliative Care Research Department, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6511-412X
Bridget CandyMarie Curie Palliative Care Research Department, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9935-7840
Patrick StoneMarie Curie Palliative Care Research Department, University College London, London, UK.
University College London · GB

Funding

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

Abstract

backgroundComplementary therapies are widely used in palliative care settings. Qualitative research found that people with advanced disease report a range of physical and psychological benefits from complementary therapies, however evidence of their effectiveness from clinical trials is inconclusive. This may be because trials are limited by use of inappropriate outcome measures.

aimsTo identify tools which capture the impact of massage, reflexology and aromatherapy in people with advanced disease. We (1) identified multi-domain tools used to evaluate these therapies in populations with any chronic health condition and (2) assessed whether tools were valid and psychometrically robust in populations with advanced disease.

designA two-stage systematic review was conducted using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) guidelines (PROSPERO: CRD42020161199). DATA SOURCES: Six databases were searched (August 2021). Study methodological quality, tool psychometric properties and evidence quality were assessed. A global comparison score was generated.

resultsStage 1: 66 trials using 40 different multi-domain tools were identified. Stage 2: Of these tools, we identified papers for seven tools regarding development or validation in advanced disease populations. The majority of psychometric data were inconsistent or inconclusive. Data were mostly of low quality due to methodological issues.

conclusionOf the tools identified, 'Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General' appears to be the most suitable alternative tool against COMSIN criteria, for trials of massage, reflexology and aromatherapy in palliative care. Further tool validation is required before firm recommendations can be made. Co-development of a core outcome set could ensure relevant domains are assessed.

Indexed as

AromatherapyHospice and Palliative Care NursingHumansMassagePalliative CarePsychometricscomplementary therapiespalliative carepatient reported outcome measuresquality of lifeSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID36071641
PMCPMC9606018
OpenAlexW4294992855

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.