Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40395955›Full record

ArticleGMS journal for medical education2025

There is no cheating death: A qualitative study of 4

Alicia Rey, Boris Cantin, Raphaël Bonvin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in GMS journal for medical education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Alicia ReyFribourg Hospital (HFR), Palliative Care Center, Villars-sur-Glâne, Switzerland.
Boris CantinFribourg Hospital (HFR), Palliative Care Center, Villars-sur-Glâne, Switzerland.
Raphaël BonvinUniversity of Fribourg, Faculty of Biology and Medicine, Medical Education Unit, Fribourg, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance and objective: All medical students are confronted with death during their medical curriculum. Despite this, too few qualitative studies have examined this reality's impact, the support provided by clinical supervisors and the theoretical instruction dedicated to this theme in the university curriculum. This study explores these issues and gives students an opportunity to express themselves, to improve their training and well-being during their pre-graduate. Design/method: Qualitative study conducted via semi-structured interviews with 4 Findings: Five themes emerged: fantasies about death before the encounter, first encounters with death, need for a global approach, impact of clinical supervisors' skills and denial of death during training. Whether positive or negative, confronting death is often an intense experience for students. They value clinical supervisors who care about how they're feeling, which is all too rare. According to students, the curriculum absolutely needs to be improved to better prepare them for the reality on the ground. Conclusion: This study highlights the intensity of students' experiences with death and enables us to propose necessary improvements to their support and training. We believe that students would benefit from a space in which to explore their experiences with death. This would enable them to develop better skills for supporting end-of-life patients and their loved ones, while enhancing their own resources.

Indexed as

Attitude to DeathStudents, MedicalAdultCurriculumEducation, Medical, UndergraduateFemaleFranceHumansInterviews as TopicMaleQualitative Researchattitude to deathmedical educationmedical studentspalliative carequalitative research

Identifiers

PMID40395955
PMCPMC12086245

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.