ArticleBMC palliative care2022
Advance care planning and goals of care discussion: the perspectives of Brazilian oncologists.
Article in BMC palliative care, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Using nudges with electronic health records systems to improve advance care planning: a systematic review.BMC palliative care · 2025Pooled it
- Implementation and effectiveness of advance care planning in hospitalized older adults with chronic heart failure: a mixed-methods systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Charting the future: A multi-setting medical chart study of advance care planning in Parkinson's disease and atypical Parkinsonism.Journal of Parkinson's disease · 2026Article
- Understanding Advance Care Planning in oncology: Barriers, perceptions, and pathways toward patient-centered decision-making.Palliative & supportive care · 2026Article
- Mapping advance care planning and advance directives in Latin America.BMC palliative care · 2025Article
- Casemanagers Positioned as Key Advance Care Planning Conversationalists in Oncology Care: A Qualitative Interview Study on the Perspectives of Healthcare Professionals and Patients.Cancer medicine · 2025Article
- Barriers and facilitators that hospital clinicians perceive to discuss the personal values, wishes, and needs of patients in palliative care: a mixed-methods systematic review.Palliative care and social practice · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAdvance care planning (ACP) and goals of care discussions are important instruments that enable respect for patient autonomy, especially in patients with a life-threatening disease, such as cancer. Despite their well-established benefits, ACP and goals of care discussions are still not frequently performed in clinical oncology practice. Understanding the barriers to this topic is the first step toward developing future interventions that are more likely to improve professional practice and patient satisfaction with care.
aimTo explore Brazilian oncologists' barriers to discuss goals of care and advance care planning.
methodsA cross-sectional study was developed to identify Brazilian oncologists' barriers to discussing goals of care and ACP. The Decide-Oncology questionnaire was used to identify the importance of these barriers according to oncologists' perceptions. Participants were asked to rank the importance of various barriers to discussing goals of care, ranging from 1 (extremely unimportant) to 7 (extremely important). A quantitative analysis using descriptive statistics was used, including median and interquartile intervals and a qualitative analysis based on Bardin content analysis of the two open questions.
resultsSixty-six oncologists participated in this study. Most of them perceived the patient and family's related barriers as the most important, such as patients' difficulty in understanding their diagnosis and accepting their prognosis. Physician and external related factors, such as lack of training and lack of time for this conversation, were also described as important barriers. Participants with formal training regarding goals of care communication and with experience in palliative care perceived the lack of patients' advanced directives as a significant barrier and manifested more willingness to participate in decision-making about goals of care. The lack of access and of support for referral to palliative care was also considered a significant barrier for ACP and goals of care discussion.
conclusionThe identification of barriers that limit the discussion of ACP and early palliative care referrals can certainly help to prioritise the next steps for future studies aimed at improving ACP and helping clinicians to better support patients through shared decision-making based on the patient's values and experiences.
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.