Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39581966›Full record

ArticleInternational journal for equity in health2024

Equity of access to palliative care: a scoping review.

Gonçalo Sítima, Carlos Galhardo-Branco, Paulo Reis-Pina

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in International journal for equity in health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

3 authors.

Gonçalo SítimaFaculty of Medicine, University of Lisbon, Avenida Professor Egas Moniz, Lisbon, 1649-028, Portugal.
Carlos Galhardo-BrancoAmadora/Sintra Local Health Unit EPE, Amadora, Estremadura, Portugal.
Paulo Reis-PinaFaculty of Medicine, University of Lisbon, Avenida Professor Egas Moniz, Lisbon, 1649-028, Portugal. paulopina@medicina.ulisboa.pt.ORCID 0000-0002-4665-585X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPalliative care (PC) has the potential to alleviate suffering and enhance quality of life for patients with serious progressive diseases; however, access to PC remains unequal across different populations.

objectiveThis scoping review aimed to systematically examine the literature on: (1) the primary contributors to inequity in accessing PC; (2) the key barriers to achieving equitable access to PC; (3) the essential recommendations for addressing these issues.

methodsThe PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase databases were searched for English-language articles published since 2017. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Population- people with chronic, progressive, life-threatening, or limiting diseases. Interventions- any PC intervention, including teams, services, programs, or strategies implemented in both hospital and community settings. Outcomes- equity in access to PC. Study Design- any. The PRISMA (extension for scoping reviews) recommendations were followed.

resultsFourteen studies were included: half originated from North America (USA, n = 5; Canada, n = 2) and the other half from Europe (UK, n = 4; Spain, n = 1) and Australia (n = 2). Most studies focused on ethnic/racial discrimination (n = 4) or geographical discrepancies (n = 4). The remaining studies addressed PC in low- or middle-income countries (n = 2), gender discrepancies (n = 1), informal caregiving (n = 1), socioeconomic inequities (n = 2), and barriers to accessing PC (n = 1). Barriers to equitable access to PC include difficulties in identifying patients nearing the end of life, the "survival imperative," the "normalization of dying," misconceptions, mistrust, limited information about PC and end-of-life care, and a fragmented care system. Conversely, enablers of equitable access to PC encompass proper patient evaluation and workforce education, addressing basic survival needs and social determinants of equity, and promoting intersectoral collaboration, community advocacy, and engagement.

conclusionAchieving equity in PC is a complex endeavor requiring strong commitment and action at both policy and governmental levels. Additionally, it calls for sustained efforts in clinical practice, workforce planning, capacity building, community engagement, and research investment to implement and assess public health approaches to PC. Future research should aim to provide more comprehensive and generalizable insights into the determinants of equitable access, as well as the enablers and barriers to PC and end-of-life care.

Indexed as

Healthcare DisparitiesHealth Services AccessibilityPalliative CareHealth EquityHumansQuality of LifeEnd-of-life careHealth disparateHealth equityHealth services accessibilityMinority and vulnerable populationsPalliative careScoping reviewSocioeconomic disparities in health

Identifiers

PMID39581966
PMCPMC11587758

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.