SynthesisPalliative medicine2026
Telehealth in palliative care settings: A systematic review of argument-based ethics literature.
Synthesis in Palliative medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Effectiveness of and implementation requirements for telehealth in palliative care patients with advanced cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Palliative medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Nurse-led tele-palliative care for symptom management and family support: A hybrid umbrella review of reviews and primary studies.Palliative & supportive care · 2026Pooled it
- Article
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
backgroundThe need for palliative care is rising rapidly, but meeting global demand is falling behind. Telepalliative care offers a potential solution, though its implementation requires careful ethical evaluation.
aimTo provide an overview of the ethical concepts and arguments related to telepalliative care as presented in the argument-based literature.
designWe conducted a systematic review of argument-based literature following PRISMA-guidelines (PROSPERO: CRD42024533732). Data extraction and synthesis followed the Qualitative Analysis Guide of Leuven. DATA SOURCES: We searched 12 databases covering medical, ethical, and technological disciplines using broad, unfiltered terms. Publications in English, French, German, or Dutch on telehealth, palliative care, and ethics were considered. Two researchers independently screened publications, using peer review as a quality proxy due to the lack of standards for argument-based literature.
resultsTwenty-six publications were included. Two main ethical approaches emerged: one related to the four principles of biomedical ethics and the other to care. Regarding respect for autonomy, telepalliative care may both promote and limit autonomy, with concerns raised about informed consent, privacy, and confidentiality. Regarding beneficence, potential improvements in symptom management and quality of life were identified. Regarding non-maleficence, risks such as replacing in-person care and medicalizing the home environment were highlighted. Regarding justice, issues of access, equity, distributive justice, and environmental issues were addressed. Concerns about the patient-provider relationship and holistic care were central to care-related arguments.
conclusionsTelehealth's benefits challenge its incompatibility with palliative care, however, significant risks threaten core palliative care values. Thus, careful implementation must prioritize ethical considerations.
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.