ArticleBMJ supportive & palliative care2024
Artificial intelligence for better goals of care documentation.
Article in BMJ supportive & palliative care, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
objectivesLower rates of goals of care (GOC) conversations have been observed in non-white hospitalised patients, which may contribute to racial disparities in end-of-life care. We aimed to assess how a targeted initiative to increase GOC documentation rates is associated with GOC documentation by race.
methodsWe retrospectively assessed GOC documentation during a targeted GOC initiative for adult patients with an artificial intelligence predicted elevated risk of mortality. Patients were admitted to an urban academic medical centre in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania between July 2021 and 31 December 2022.
resultsThe 3643 studied patients had a median age of 72 (SD 13.0) and were predominantly white (87%) with 42% admitted to an intensive care unit and 15% dying during admission. GOC documentation was completed for 28% (n=1019/3643). By race, GOC was documented for 30% black (n=105/351), 28% white (n=883/3161) and 24% other (n=31/131) patients (p=0.3933). There was no statistical difference in the rate of documented GOC among races over time (p=0.5142).
conclusionsA targeted initiative to increase documented GOC conversations for hospitalised patients with an elevated risk of mortality is associated with similar documentation rates across racial groups. Further research is needed to assess whether this initiative may promote racial equity in GOC documentation in other settings.
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.