ArticleBMC geriatrics2023
End-of-life treatment preference discussions between older people and their physician before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: cross sectional and longitudinal analyses from the Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam.
Article in BMC geriatrics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam: design and cohort update 2025.European journal of epidemiology · 2025Article
- Supporting Family Caregivers of Nursing Home Residents with Dementia in Their Last Week of Life: A Survey Among Bereaved Family Caregivers.Palliative medicine reports · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCOVID-19 could lead to hospitalisation and ICU admission, especially in older adults. Therefore, during the pandemic, it became more important to discuss wishes and preferences, such as older peoples' desire for intensive treatment in a hospital in acute situations, or not. This study explores what percentage of Dutch older people aged 75 and over discussed Advance Care Planning (ACP) topics with a physician during the first months of the COVID-19 pandemic and whether this was different in these people before the COVID-19 pandemic.
methodsData of two ancillary data collections of the Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam were used: the LASA 75 PLUS study and the LASA COVID-19 study. The latter provided cross sectional data (during COVID-19; n = 428) and longitudinal data came from participants in both studies (before and during COVID-19; n = 219).
resultsMost older adults had thought about ACP topics during COVID-19 (76,4%), and a minority had also discussed ACP topics with a physician (20.3%). Thinking about ACP topics increased during COVID-19 compared to before COVID-19 in a sample with measurements on both timeframes (82,5% vs 68,0%). Not thinking about ACP topics decreased in the first months of the COVID-pandemic compared to before COVID-19 for all ACP topics together (68.0% vs 82.2%) and each topic separately (hospital 42.0% vs 63.9%; nursing home 36.5% vs 53.3%; treatment options 47.0% vs 62.1%; resuscitation 53.0% vs 70.7%).
conclusionsOlder people do think about ACP topics, which is an important first step in ACP, and this has increased during COVID-19. However, discussing ACP topics with a physician is still not that common. General practitioners could therefore take the initiative in broaching the subject of ACP. This can for instance be done by organizing information meetings.
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.