Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38545089›Full record

ArticleEClinicalMedicine2024

The rise of home death in the COVID-19 pandemic: a population-based study of death certificate data for adults from 32 countries, 2012-2021.

Sílvia Lopes, Andrea Bruno de Sousa, Mayra Delalibera, Elizabeth Namukwaya, Joachim Cohen, Barbara Gomes

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Regional inequities in myocardial infarction burden in Brazil's public healthcare system.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2026
    Article
  4. Trends in place of death in Peru, 2017-2024: a nationwide analysis.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Observational
  20. 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

6 authors.

Sílvia LopesFaculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal.
Andrea Bruno de SousaFaculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal.
Mayra DelaliberaFaculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal.
Elizabeth NamukwayaFaculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal.
Joachim CohenEnd-of-Life Care Research Group, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Brussels, Belgium.
Barbara GomesFaculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: During the coronavirus 2019 disease (COVID-19) pandemic, health systems had to respond to the needs of COVID-19 patients, while caring for patients with other life-threatening conditions. Pandemics, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, stir global health and mortality patterns. This is likely to include trends in dying places. In this paper, we examine trends in place of death for adults in 32 countries, comparing the initial COVID-19 pandemic years (2020-2021) with the eight years before the pandemic (2012-2019). Methods: Data on place of death for all adults (18 years and over) that died from 1 January 2012 to 31 December 2021 were requested (47 countries approached, 32 included). The classification of place of death varied widely between countries. "Home" was the most common category, the remaining category groups comprised "hospital or health institution", "other defined", and "ill-defined". We analysed place of death data in an aggregate form, by sex, age group, and selected underlying causes of death (cancer, dementia, and COVID-19). Findings: The study included 100.7 million people (51.5% male, 68.0% with ≥70 years), 20.4% died from cancer and 5.8% from dementia; 30.8% of deaths took place at home. The percentage of home deaths rose from 30.1% in 2012-2013 to 30.9% in 2018-2019 and further to 32.2% in the pandemic (2020-2021). Home deaths increased during the pandemic in 23 countries. In most countries the rise was greater in women and cancer; age differences were not consistent. Interpretation: Our study shows that there was a rise in home deaths during the pandemic, but with variability across countries, sex, age, and causes of death. The sex difference observed in most countries may have several explanations, including more engagement of women in discussions about end of life care planning and hospital admission avoidance. A higher rise of home deaths among people dying of cancer may be explained by the more predictable disease trajectory compared to non-malignant conditions, as well as earlier and better integrated palliative care. Funding: This work is part of the EOLinPLACE Project, which has received funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (grant agreement No 948609).

Indexed as

AdultCOVID-19Death certificatesMortalityPalliative care

Identifiers

PMID38545089
PMCPMC10965402

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.