How good are we at reporting the socioeconomic position, ethnicity, race, religion and main language of research participants? A review of the quality of reporting in palliative care intervention studies.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Models of palliative care for culturally and linguistically diverse people in high-income nations: A scoping review.Palliative medicine · 2026
   Article
2. Who gets included? Equity in digital and decentralised mental health and neurodevelopmental trials: A systematic review.PLOS digital health · 2026
   Article
3. Developing a Theory of Change and Implementation Plan to implement a novel child- and family-centred outcome measure in paediatric palliative care.Palliative medicine · 2025
   Article

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as