Trial reportJournal of pain and symptom management2024
Pandemic Effects on Stability of End-of-Life Preferences and Patient-Surrogate Dyad Congruence.
Trial report in Journal of pain and symptom management, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Instability in End-of-Life Goals and Preferences of Patients Who Are Seriously Ill: A Systematic Review.JAMA network open · 2025Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
contextWhether a largescale disaster alters people's previous decisions about their end-of-life care is unknown.
objectivesWe examined the effects of a disaster, the COVID-19 pandemic, on stability of end-of-life care preferences among dialysis patients and on patient-surrogate goals-of-care congruence.
methodsWe used a natural experimental design to examine goals-of-care preferences pre- and postexposure to the pandemic during a pragmatic trial testing SPIRIT (sharing patient's illness representations to increase trust), an evidence-based advance care planning (ACP) intervention. There were 151 patient-surrogate dyads who prior to the pandemic lockdown had completed baseline (T1) and postintervention assessments (T2) regarding their goals-of-care preferences in two end-of-life scenarios. Of those 151 dyads, 59 intervention, and 51 usual care dyads consented to be in the present study and completed the goals-of-care tool two additional times, at enrollment (T3) and six months later (T4), along with the COVID stress scale (CSS). Dyad congruence was ascertained by comparing patient and surrogate responses to the goals-of-care tool.
resultsThere were no changes over time in the proportions of patients who chose comfort-care-only in the goals-of-care tool. The proportion of patients who chose comfort-care-only and dyad congruence were higher in SPIRIT compared to usual care, but there was no interaction between that treatment effect and exposure to the pandemic. CSS was associated with neither patients' preferences nor dyad congruence.
conclusionsThe pandemic alone did not appear to influence patients' goals-of-care preferences or dyad congruence. This finding supports the stability of value-based end-of-life preferences in general, even during a disaster.
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.