ArticleJCO global oncology2023
Quality of Dying and Death of Patients With Cancer in Hospice Care in Uganda.
Article in JCO global oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Factors related to good death from the perspectives of informal caregivers of cancer patients: a systematic review.BMC palliative care · 2025Pooled it
- Analysis of the quality of dying and death in end-stage intensive care unit patients in China: A single-center cross-sectional study.Medicine · 2026Article
- The legal needs of people receiving palliative care in Uganda: A multi-method assessment to advance universal health coverage.Palliative care and social practice · 2025Article
- The quality of dying and death of patients with cancer from Shanghai in China from the perspective of healthcare providers: A cross-sectional study.International journal of nursing sciences · 2024Article
- Practices for Reporting Scale Structure and Summarizing Scores in Studies Using FAMCARE Scale to Assess Caregiver Satisfaction with Cancer Care: A Scoping Review.Patient related outcome measures · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeDespite advances in palliative care in Uganda, there has been relatively little recent patient-centered research investigating end-of-life outcomes in this region. We assessed the quality of dying and death of patients with cancer in hospice care in Uganda.
methodsBereaved caregivers of patients who received hospice care in Uganda and died 2-12 months earlier (N = 201) completed the Quality of Dying and Death Questionnaire, which includes 31 items and single-item ratings of overall quality of dying and moment of death, and the FAMCARE measure of family satisfaction with cancer care.
resultsCaregivers reported low-intermediate overall quality of dying (mean [M] standard deviation [SD], 3.25 [2.98]) and overall quality of moment of death (M [SD], 3.59 [3.51]), with 47.0% of the ratings of these two outcomes in the poor range, but the mean family satisfaction with care was high (M [SD], 77.75 [10.26]). Most Quality of Dying and Death Questionnaire items (74.2%) were rated within the intermediate range. Items rated within the good range were religious-spiritual, interpersonal, and personal facets; two items within the poor range reflected physical functioning. Overall quality of dying was most strongly correlated with pain control (Spearman's rho [r
conclusionEnd-of-life care in hospices in Uganda requires further improvement, particularly with regard to symptom control. Patient-centered data could bolster advocacy efforts to support quality improvement of palliative care in this and other countries.
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.