ArticlePloS one2025
Effects of different types of Advance Care Planning workshops: A scoping review protocol.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAdvance Care Planning(ACP) plays a crucial role in ensuring that patients' wishes are respected and fulfilled, helping to improve the quality of care and the efficient use of resources. Achieving effective ACP promotion depends on appropriate education and training. Evidence exists that ACP workshops are feasible and effective in enhancing the understanding, competence, confidence, and engagement in ACP among trainees. Systematic summary and analysis of existing ACP workshop-related research will help identify knowledge gaps and research trends in the current field and provide a standardized framework and empirical support for future training design.
objectivesThe overall aim of this scoping review was to systematically map existing literature about ACP workshops, provide an overview of the contents and effects of various ACP workshops, and identify limitations and gaps in knowledge.
methodsThis scoping review will adhere to the JBI methodology and the results will reported according to the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Relevant articles will be systematically searched in six electronic databases (Pubmed, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar). The research on ACP workshops conducted in any population will be included. Two reviewers individually selected the studies: first by screening titles and abstracts and second by screening full-text articles. A third reviewer will arbitrate discrepancies during the screening process. Extract data in a standardized manner using forms that have undergone team review, and data will then be synthesized and interpreted. DISCUSSION: This scoping review will identify effective training methods, topics, and research gaps by comparing the content and effectiveness of different workshops, which will help to form best practices and enhance the effectiveness of ACP training. REGISTRATION DETAILS: Open Science Framework under https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/2ZUP6.
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.