Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40823573›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2025

Identification and synthesis of end-of-life decision-making measures: a scoping review.

Patricia Bucko, Miriam A Novack, Emily H Ho, Berivan Ece, Evan Burleigh, Molly A Mather, Tatiana Karpouzian-Rogers, Elizabeth M Dworak, Sarah Pila, Zahra Hosseinian and 4 more

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

14 authors.

Patricia BuckoDepartment of Medical Social Sciences, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, United States.
Miriam A NovackDepartment of Medical Social Sciences, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, United States.
Emily H HoDepartment of Medical Social Sciences, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, United States.
Berivan EceDepartment of Medical Social Sciences, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, United States.
Evan BurleighDepartment of Psychology, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, United States.
Molly A MatherDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, United States.
Tatiana Karpouzian-RogersDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, United States.
Elizabeth M DworakDepartment of Medical Social Sciences, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, United States.
Sarah PilaDepartment of Medical Social Sciences, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, United States.
Zahra HosseinianDepartment of Medical Social Sciences, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, United States.
S Duke HanDepartment of Psychology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, United States.
Peter A LichtenbergInstitute of Gerontology, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, United States.
Richard C GershonDepartment of Medical Social Sciences, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, United States.
Sandra WeintraubDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, United States.

Funding

ARMCADA - Advancing Reliable Measurement in Cognitive Aging and Decision-making AbilityU24AG082022 · NIA · NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY AT CHICAGO · PI RICHARD GERSHON, SANDRA WEINTRAUB · 2023 to 2026
$7.9M
NIA NIH HHS U24 AG082022
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Cognitive impairment (CI) and related conditions are known to affect decision-making (DM), particularly in older adult populations. The intersection of CI and DM ability is crucial in end-of-life (EoL) care, where there is a confluence of heterogenous preferences and values often across different constituents (e.g., healthcare providers, family members, and proxies). Standardized questionnaires are necessary to characterize patients' EoL decisions, preferences, and readiness, but the extent of available measures is widely unknown. Objective: This scoping review aims to summarize the current state of the literature regarding EoL decision-making measures. This effort supports the development of the Advancing Reliable Measurement in Cognitive Aging and Decision-making Ability (ARMCADA) research initiative, which seeks to develop a decision-making battery for use in older adults. Methods: Following the Arksey and O'Malley framework, we conducted a scoping review for multiple domains of DM in studies published between January 2018 and November 2023. Any paper that assessed or characterized DM in participants 45 years and older was extracted for the DM domain, population characteristics, and DM measures. Results: An initial search identified 16,286 articles, of which 705 were classified as assessing DM. Of those, 34 articles included measures of the EoL domain, and 28 unique measures were identified. The MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool for Treatment (MacCAT-T), the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS), and the Decision Regret Scale (DRS) were the only assessments used more than once in the scoping review. Many studies assessed clinical populations, including those with CI/dementia (12%), cancer (24%), and chronic conditions (16%). Findings show that measures used at the end of life emphasize decisional preferences, efficacy, and conflict. Conclusion: Overall, this review highlights the lack of DM ability measures that can assess older adults' capacity to make decisions regarding EoL-specific issues (e.g., life-sustaining treatment and pain management).

Indexed as

advance care planningagingcognitive impairmentdecision-makingend-of-life

Identifiers

PMID40823573
PMCPMC12350294

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.