ArticlePalliative medicine reports2025
Conducting Research in Palliative Care as Viewed by Interprofessional Care Teams: Insights from a Cross-Sectional Survey.
Article in Palliative medicine reports, 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
Introduction: Conducting studies in palliative care can be challenging. It has been highlighted that the interprofessional team may have their own reasons for not engaging in research projects. We aimed to identify barriers and facilitators to the involvement of palliative care team members in research projects. Method: We used a cross-sectional online survey with qualitative and quantitative components to identify barriers and facilitators encountered by palliative care health professionals. Participants were physicians, nurses, nurse assistants, physiotherapists, dieticians, and occupational therapists working in the Division of Palliative Medicine of the Geneva University Hospitals in Switzerland. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and content analysis for the open-ended questions. Results: A total of 107 questionnaires were sent, and 51 participants (48%) provided responses, of whom 75% expressed an interest in research, although only 47% had previously taken part in a research project. The most cited barriers were a lack of training on how to conduct studies, a lack of time, and a lack of funding. The main facilitators were the recognition that research enhances the quality of care and the belief that patients should be respected in their autonomy and given the opportunity to participate in research projects. Conclusion: The interprofessional palliative care team would benefit from time, funds, and training in order to enhance a research culture within the team. The establishment of an interprofessional network to guide and share experiences would also be a good way to promote this culture.
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.