ArticleBMJ open2025
Triangular perspectives of healthcare providers, patients and their families on ICU palliative care: a protocol for a systematic review of qualitative studies.
Article in BMJ open, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIn the intensive care unit (ICU), palliative care encounters obstacles such as decision conflicts, psychological stress and cultural differences among patients, families and healthcare providers. The well-being and the care quality of patients are influenced by these factors. The highly technical and curative-focused environment of the ICU presents a challenge for palliative care without appropriate integration. Certainly, it is imperative to comprehend these issues and devise strategies to reconcile curative and palliative needs. This paper employs qualitative metaintegration to appraise the experiences and perspectives of palliative care in the ICU, emphasising its outcomes, barriers and the necessity of balanced care and treatment. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study conducted a comprehensive search of both the published and unpublished literature (such as grey literature) from a variety of databases, concerning PubMed, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Web of Science, Embase, Scopus, PsycINFO, CNKI, Wanfang, CBM and VIP, up to 10 July 2024. The articles will be retrieved and incorporated into EndNote X9 to facilitate organisation. Two independent researchers will evaluate the studies using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Checklist for Qualitative Research, and a third researcher will resolve all discrepancies. Data extraction and results synthesis will be performed independently based on the JBI qualitative data extraction tool. Finally, the ConQual method will be employed to estimate the calibre of the compiled results. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The systematic review was conducted without the necessity of obtaining ethical clearance from a research committee, as it analysed previously published studies that did not contain any personal identifying information of participants. The review's findings were presented to key stakeholders and submitted for consideration in peer-reviewed journals. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42024571594.
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.