SynthesisPloS one2024
Examining how goals of care communication are conducted between doctors and patients with severe acute illness in hospital settings: A realist systematic review.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Goals of care discussions in hospitalised patients: systematic review of randomised trials.BMJ supportive & palliative care · 2026Pooled it
- Communication and medical errors: a bibliometric analysis of research trends and knowledge structures.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Trial
- Guided Goals of Care Conversations Reveal Evolving, Personalized Priorities.Journal of pain and symptom management · 2026Article
- Goals of Care Discussions in Medical Training: Integrating Palliative Care for Holistic, Patient-Centered Care.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Clinicians' Perspectives on Strengthening Interprofessional Teamwork to Support Surrogate Decision-Makers of Critically Ill Patients in ICUs.Critical care explorations · 2026Article
- Predictors of Advance Directive Changes in Ontario Nursing Home Residents: A Case-Control Study.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2026Article
- Article
- Factors associated with end-of-life quality in terminally ill cancer patients' last six months of life: a longitudinal study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025Article
- 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
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatient involvement in goals of care decision-making has shown to enhance satisfaction, affective-cognitive outcomes, allocative efficiency, and reduce unwarranted clinical variation. However, the involvement of patients in goals of care planning within hospitals remains limited, particularly where mismatches in shared understanding between doctors and patients are present.
aimTo identify and critically examine factors influencing goals of care conversations between doctors and patients during acute hospital illness.
designRealist systematic review following the RAMESES standards. A protocol has been published in PROSPERO (CRD42021297410). The review utilised realist synthesis methodology, including a scoping literature search to generate initial theories, theory refinement through stakeholder consultation, and a systematic literature search to support program theory. DATA SOURCES: Data were collected from Medline, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, PsychINFO, Scopus databases (1946 to 14 July 2023), citation tracking, and Google Scholar. Open-Grey was utilized to identify relevant grey literature. Studies were selected based on relevance and rigor to support theory development.
resultsOur analysis included 52 papers, supporting seven context-mechanism-output (CMO) hypotheses. Findings suggest that shared doctor-patient understanding relies on doctors being confident, competent, and personable to foster trusting relationships with patients. Low doctor confidence often leads to avoidance of discussions. Moreover, information provided to patients is often inconsistent, biased, procedure-focused, and lacks personalisation. Acute illness, medical jargon, poor health literacy, and high emotional states further hinder patient understanding.
conclusionsGoals of care conversations in hospitals are nuanced and often suboptimal. To improve patient experiences and outcome of care interventions should be personalised and tailored to individual needs, emphasizing effective communication and trusting relationships among patients, families, doctors, and healthcare teams. Inclusion of caregivers and acknowledgment at the service level are crucial for achieving desired outcomes. Implications for policy, research, and clinical practice, including further training and skills development for doctors, are discussed.
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.