Trial reportJAMA internal medicine2025
Advance Care Planning, End-of-Life Preferences, and Burdensome Care: A Pragmatic Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.
Trial report in JAMA internal medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04819191 (Improving Communication for Primary Care Patients), which is not on this map. Cited by 11 papers, 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.
Improving Communication for Primary Care Patients (SHARING Choices)
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Experiences of death preparedness among family caregivers of terminal patients: a systematic review and meta-synthesis.Frontiers in public health · 2026Pooled it
- Practice Variability in the SHARING Choices Pragmatic Trial of Primary Care Advance Care Planning.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2026Trial
- Article
- [When the one who heals dies. The physician at the end of life].Revista medica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social · 2026Review
- Trainee-Led Patient Education to Increase Advance Care Planning in a Geriatric Primary Care Clinic.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- Community-Based Interventions for Initiating Early End-of-Life Conversations in Nonterminally Ill Adults: A Systematic Review.Campbell systematic reviews · 2026Review
- Sliding doors at the bedside: conditional outcomes and moral judgments in end-of-life care.Critical care (London, England) · 2026Review
- A Qualitative Study of a Pilot of Clinician Perspectives on the Delivery of Medicare Annual Wellness Visits for Patients with Dementia in an Academic Health Science Center in Texas.Health services insights · 2026Article
- Diagnoses Associated With Hospitalization of Nursing Home Residents With Severe Functional Impairment and Terminal Illness.Journal of the American Medical Directors Association · 2025Article
- Community nurses' willingness to implement Advance Care Planning (ACP) and their attitudes toward death: current status and correlation analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Examining Medical Interventions in Older Adults with Limited Life Expectancy-Opportunities and Challenges for De-implementation.Sage open agingReview
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: Primary care is a key setting for advance care planning (ACP). Objective: To test the effects of a multicomponent primary care-based ACP intervention (SHARING Choices) on documented end-of-life preferences and potentially burdensome care at end of life. Design, Setting, and Participants: This pragmatic cluster randomized clinical trial in primary care practices from 2 health systems was conducted between March 2021 and April 2022. Adults 65 years and older with a scheduled in-person or telehealth visit with clinicians from participating practices were eligible for inclusion. Interventions: The treatment protocol encompassed an introductory letter from the clinic, access to a designated facilitator trained in ACP, a person-family agenda-setting checklist, shared access to the patient portal, a mailed advance directive, and print education. The control protocol encompassed usual care. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes included (1) new electronic health record-documented end-of-life preferences (advance directive or medical orders for life-sustaining treatment) at 12 months among those without documentation at baseline and (2) receipt of potentially burdensome care within 6 months of death among a subsample of Maryland residents with serious illness who died within 18 months of study entry from health information exchange data. Results: There were 19 practices in the intervention arm and 32 practices in the control arm. The study included 22 949 patients in the intervention group (13 575 women [59.2%]; mean [SD] age, 73.9 [7.2] years; 1674 [7.3%] with diagnosed dementia) and 41 966 in the control group (25 057 women [59.7%]; mean [SD] age, 74.0 [7.1] years; 3223 [7.9%] with diagnosed dementia). A total of 17 907 patients (27.6%) were Black, 1373 (2.1%) were Hispanic, 40 345 (62.2%) were White, and 5290 (8.2%) were another race (including American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, and Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and missing race). Grant-funded facilitators initiated 17 931 outreach attempts by phone (13 963 [77.9%]) and through the patient portal (3968 [22.1%]) to patients from intervention practices, and 1181 engaged in facilitator-led ACP conversations. New end-of-life preferences were documented for 2190 of 18 314 patients in the intervention arm (12.0%) and 2130 of 32 321 in the control arm (6.6%). This treatment effect was significant for the overall cohort (adjusted odds ratio, 2.15; 95% CI, 2.02-2.30) and present but attenuated for Black patients, those 75 years and older, and those diagnosed dementia. Among 1498 Maryland resident decedents, potentially burdensome care was higher in the intervention group (150 of 521 [28.8%] vs 204 of 977 [20.9%]; adjusted odds ratio, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.08-1.81). Conclusions and Relevance: In this pragmatic cluster randomized clinical trial, the SHARING Choices intervention increased new documentation of end-of-life preferences but also increased potentially burdensome care at end of life. Mixed findings underscore the importance of comprehensive support for those with serious illness and prioritizing patient-relevant outcomes in ACP interventional research. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04819191.
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.