Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39099623›Full record

ArticlePalliative care and social practice2024

'Someone must do it': multiple views on family's role in end-of-life care - an international qualitative study.

Vilma A Tripodoro, Verónica I Veloso, Eva Víbora Martín, Hana Kodba-Čeh, Miša Bakan, Birgit H Rasmussen, Sofía C Zambrano, Melanie Joshi, Svandis Íris Hálfdánardóttir, Guðlaug Helga Ásgeirsdóttir and 8 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Palliative care and social practice, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Family perceptions of the transition from hospital to home palliative care: a phenomenological study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

18 authors.

Vilma A TripodoroInstituto Pallium Latinoamérica, Bonpland 2287, Ciudad de Buenos Aires (1425), Argentina.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2328-6032
Verónica I VelosoInstituto Pallium Latinoamérica, Buenos Aires, Ciudad de Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Eva Víbora MartínFundación Cudeca, Malaga, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2680-8019
Hana Kodba-ČehUniversity Clinic of Pulmonary and Allergic Diseases Golnik, Research Department, Golnik, Slovenia.
Miša BakanUniversity Clinic of Pulmonary and Allergic Diseases Golnik, Research Department, Golnik, Slovenia.
Birgit H RasmussenInstitute for Palliative Care, Lund University and Region Skåne, Sweden.
Sofía C ZambranoInstitute of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Melanie JoshiDepartment of Palliative Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Svandis Íris HálfdánardóttirPalliative Care Unit, Landspitali - The National University Hospital of Iceland, Reykjavik Iceland.
Guðlaug Helga ÁsgeirsdóttirPalliative Care Unit, Landspitali - The National University Hospital of Iceland, Reykjavik Iceland.
Elisabeth RomarheimRegional Centre of Excellence for Palliative Care, Western Norway, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway.
Dagny Faksvåg HaugenRegional Centre of Excellence for Palliative Care, Western Norway, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway.
Tamsin McGlincheyInstitute of Life Course and Medical Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Berivan YildizErasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Pilar Barnestein-FonsecaFundación Cudeca, Malaga, Spain.
Anne GoossensenUniversity of Humanistic Studies, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Urška LunderUniversity Clinic of Pulmonary and Allergic Diseases Golnik, Research Department, Golnik, Slovenia.
Agnes van der HeideErasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Family is a crucial social institution in end-of-life care. Family caregivers are encouraged to take on more responsibility at different times during the illness, providing personal and medical care. Unpaid work can be overburdening, with women often spending more time in care work than men. Objectives: This study explored multiple views on the family's role in end-of-life care from a critical perspective and a relational autonomy lens, considering gender in a socio-cultural context and applying a relational autonomy framework. It explored patients, relatives and healthcare providers' points of view. Design: This qualitative study was part of the iLIVE project, involving patients with incurable diseases, their relatives and health carers from hospital and non-hospital sites. Methods: Individual interviews of at least five patients, five relatives and five healthcare providers in each of the 10 participating countries using a semi-structured interview guide based on Giger-Davidhizar-Haff's model for cultural assessment in end-of-life care. Thematic analysis was performed initially within each country and across the complete dataset. Data sources, including researchers' field notes, were translated into English for international collaborative analysis. Results: We conducted 158 interviews (57 patients, 48 relatives and 53 healthcare providers). After collaborative analysis, five themes were identified across the countries: family as a finite care resource, families' active role in decision-making, open communication with the family, care burden and socio-cultural mandates. Families were crucial for providing informal care during severe illness, often acting as the only resource. Patients acknowledged the strain on carers, leading to a conceptual model highlighting socio-cultural influences, relational autonomy, care burden and feminisation of care. Conclusion: Society, health teams and family systems still need to better support the role of family caregivers described across countries. The model implies that family roles in end-of-life care balance relational autonomy with socio-cultural values. Real-world end-of-life scenarios do not occur in a wholly individualistic, closed-off atmosphere but in an interpersonal setting. Gender is often prominent, but normative ideas influence the decisions and actions of all involved.

Indexed as

care burdenend-of-life carefamily caregivingpalliative carequalitative research

Identifiers

PMID39099623
PMCPMC11295216

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.