ArticleBMJ open2025
Impact of proactively inviting people with advanced cancer to talk about the end of life: a randomised clinical trial protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06420609 (Efficacy of a Proactive Approach to Death Thoughts in People With Advanced Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Efficacy of a Proactive Approach to Death Thoughts in People With Advanced Cancer: a Randomized Clinical Trial
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The patient-doctor relationship questionnaire (PDRQ-9). An overview of 20 years of research and a proposal for normalisation of scores. Systematic review.Frontiers in health services · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThere is evidence that talking about the end of life with patients facing a life-threatening disease is not upsetting, and in fact, it may even be beneficial. However, both patients and health professionals can find it difficult to engage in these conversations. The aim of this clinical trial is to explore whether proactively inviting people with advanced cancer to share their thoughts about death and dying is distressing for them, comparing the impact with usual clinical practice (ie, a reactive approach to these issues). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A stepped-wedge cluster randomised controlled trial involving six palliative care units in Spain will be conducted. Each unit will recruit participants for both the experimental and control groups. Units will be randomised to determine the order in which they will begin implementing the intervention: GO-TaD (Give the Opportunity to Talk about Death thoughts). The trial will involve six sequences and seven periods (steps), with four patients per period (patients in each period will be different). The primary outcome will be emotional distress, assessed with the Detecting Emotional Distress scale. The following secondary variables will also be analysed: hopelessness, using the Beck Hopelessness Scale; quality of the patient-professional relationship, with the Patient-Doctor Relationship Questionnaire (PDRQ-9); and quality of life, with the Palliative Outcome Scale . The trial will follow the CONSORT extension for stepped-wedge cluster randomised designs. The primary analysis will include all eligible patients, applying mixed-effects regression models for binary results and mixed linear models for continuous data. Results will be reported as risk differences and ORs, with 95% confidence intervals. Analyses by sub-groups of interest (eg, age, gender, type of palliative care unit) will also be conducted. All analyses will be performed using R. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been obtained from the researchers' university and all participating centres. Results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed open access publications, academic conferences and presentations to clinical audiences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT06420609.
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.