Trial reportJCO oncology practice2025
Facilitated Versus Patient-Directed Advance Care Planning Among Patients With Advanced Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Trial report in JCO oncology practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effects of online advance care planning (ACP) decision aid programmes on adults with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC palliative care · 2026Pooled it
- Advance care planning impact on caregivers and end-of-life care in advanced cancer.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2026Trial
- Trial
- Relationships Between Advance Care Planning Engagement, Patients' Religious Practices, and Spirituality.The American journal of hospice & 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
19 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeGuidelines recommend advance care planning (ACP) to improve patient-centered care near the end of life (EOL), but the optimal approach is unknown. This single-blind, patient-level, randomized comparative effectiveness trial compared two patient-facing ACP interventions that are widely used but differ in costs and complexity.
methodsAdult patients with advanced solid tumors and their caregivers were recruited from academic and community oncology clinics. Participants were randomly assigned to facilitated ACP using trained nurse facilitators versus patient-directed ACP using written and web-based tools. The primary outcome was patient-reported ACP engagement (assessed at baseline and 12 weeks using a 15-item validated survey; range, 0-5; higher scores indicate higher engagement). Secondary outcomes included advance directive completion and communication about EOL wishes.
resultsA total of 400 patients enrolled (mean [SD] age, 67.9 [10.5] years; 192 women [48%]). At 12 weeks, patients in the facilitated versus patient-directed group reported higher ACP engagement (4.34 [0.78]
conclusionFacilitated ACP resulted in greater increases in ACP engagement and advance directive completion than patient-directed written and web-based materials. Although some patients with advanced cancer may engage in self-directed ACP, some may need additional facilitator support.
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.