ArticleBMC palliative care2024
Acceptance of advance care planning and influencing factors from the perspective of the life cycle: a cross-sectional study.
Article in BMC palliative care, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The general public's perceptions of advance care planning (ACP) in the Asia-Pacific region: a systematic review.BMC palliative care · 2026Pooled it
- Willingness to participate in advance care planning among older adults with relatively high educational attainment in a continuing care retirement community of the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region: a qualitative study.BMC palliative care · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAdvance care planning is an important part of palliative care. Public acceptance is a prerequisite for the widespread development and implementation of advance care planning. However, little is known about the level of public's acceptance and influencing factors of advance care planning across different life cycles.
methodsA cross-sectional study in mainland China was conducted from June 20 to August 31, 2022. We used multi-stage sampling strategy to recruit participators. A stepwise linear regression analysis was used to examine the influencing factors in different life cycles (nonage, mature age, middle age and old age).
resultsThe final sample size was 18,002. The average acceptance score of advance care planning of the public throughout the entire life cycle was 64.03. The average score in nonage was 67.13, which is the highest. The average score in mature age was 63.87, in middle age was 63.51, and in old age was 63.54. Multiple linear stepwise regression results indicated that death education support level, well-being index, neighbor relations, health literacy, family social status, and siblings were influencing factors in nonage. Medical insurance, injury events, multiple properties, death education support level, health literacy, family social status, neighbor relation, social support, family health, media contact, and well-being index were influencing factors in mature age. In middle age, region, living alone, depression, debt, houses, death education support level, health literacy, social support, and family social status were influencing factors. In old age, injury event, death education support level, neighbor relation, well-being index, siblings and children were influencing factors.
conclusionsThis study is the first to compare the Chinese people with different life cycles. It found that the public's acceptance and influencing factors of advance care planning varied across different life cycles. Governments and health care personnel should emphasize autonomy and initiate advance care planning based on different life cycles and individual approaches, then introduce appropriate public health policies into newer and broader fields.
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.