Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37902232›Full record

ArticleCancer medicine2023

What is an "early palliative care" intervention? A scoping review of controlled studies in oncology.

Stephan Nadolny, Eva Schildmann, Elena S Gaßmann, Jan Schildmann

Open access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.

Stephan NadolnyInstitute for History and Ethics of Medicine, Interdisciplinary Center for Health Sciences, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-6826-6433
Eva SchildmannDepartment of Palliative Medicine, Medical Faculty, University of Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany.
Elena S GaßmannInstitute for History and Ethics of Medicine, Interdisciplinary Center for Health Sciences, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle, Germany.
Jan SchildmannInstitute for History and Ethics of Medicine, Interdisciplinary Center for Health Sciences, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-5755-7630
Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg · DEHochschule Bielefeld · DETechnische Hochschule Augsburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionEarly palliative care (EPC) has been advocated to improve cancer patients' health. However, EPC differs with regard to its elements and target groups. It is not known which parts of EPC contribute to effectiveness for which patient group. This scoping review provides a structured analysis of EPC interventions and outcome measures.

designWe searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and CENTRAL up to February 2022. We included randomized controlled trials (RCT), nonrandomized trials, cohort studies (CS), and controlled before-after studies of EPC in adult patients in English, Dutch, and German language. Interventions had to be self-labeled as EPC. Screening and data extraction were performed by two raters. A structured analysis incorporating the TIDieR checklist was performed to describe the elements of the interventions.

resultsWe screened 2651 articles, resulting in 40 articles being included: 34 studies were RCT and six studies were CS with a mean sample size of 208 patients. Patients with pancreatic (n = 10) and lung cancer (n = 9) were most often included. Studies reported different reference points for the onset of EPC such as time after diagnosis of incurable cancer (n = 18) or prognosis (n = 9). Thirteen studies provided information about elements of EPC and eight studies about the control intervention. Most frequent elements of EPC were symptom management (n = 28), case management (n = 16), and advance care planning (ACP; n = 15). Most frequently reported outcome measures were health-related quality of life (n = 26), symptom intensity (n = 6), resource use, and the patient's mood (n = 4 each).

conclusionThe elicited heterogeneity of ECP in combination with deficits of reporting are considerable barriers that should be addressed to further develop effective EPC interventions for different groups of cancer patients.

Indexed as

Lung NeoplasmsPalliative CareAdultAffectHumansQuality of LifeRandomized Controlled Trials as Topiccancerearly integrationearly palliative careoncologypalliative carescoping review

Identifiers

PMID37902232
PMCPMC10726823
OpenAlexW4388014792

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.