Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41131546›Full record

ArticleBMC palliative care2025

Artificial intelligence-based approaches for advance care planning: a scoping review.

Umut Arioz, Matthew John Allsop, William D Goodman, Suzanne Timmons, Kseniya Simbirtseva, Izidor Mlakar, Grega Mocnik

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMC palliative care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

7 authors.

Umut AriozFaculty of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Maribor, Maribor, 2000, Slovenia. umut.arioz@um.si.
Matthew John AllsopSchool of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK. M.J.Allsop@leeds.ac.uk.
William D GoodmanSchool of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Suzanne TimmonsCentre for Gerontology and Rehabilitation, School of Medicine, College of Medicine and Health, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.
Kseniya SimbirtsevaCentre for Gerontology and Rehabilitation, School of Medicine, College of Medicine and Health, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.
Izidor MlakarFaculty of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Maribor, Maribor, 2000, Slovenia.
Grega MocnikFaculty of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Maribor, Maribor, 2000, Slovenia.

Funding

European Union Horizon Europe Research and Innovation Programme 101136769
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAdvance Care Planning (ACP) empowers individuals to make informed decisions about their future healthcare. However, barriers including time constraints and a lack of clarity on professional responsibilities for ACP hinder its implementation. The application of artificial intelligence (AI) could potentially optimise elements of ACP in practice by, for example, identifying patients for whom ACP may be relevant and aiding ACP-related decision-making. However, it is unclear how applications of AI for ACP are currently being used in the delivery of palliative care.

objectivesTo explore the use of AI models for ACP, identifying key features that influence model performance, transparency of data used, source code availability, and generalizability.

methodsA scoping review was conducted using the Arksey and O'Malley framework and the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Electronic databases (Scopus and Web of Science (WoS)) and seven preprint servers were searched to identify published research articles and conference papers in English, German and French for the last 10 years' records. Our search strategy was based on terms for ACP and artificial intelligence models (including machine learning). The GRADE approach was used to assess the quality of included studies.

resultsIncluded studies (N = 41) predominantly used retrospective cohort designs and real-world electronic health record data. Most studies (n = 39) focused on identifying individuals who might benefit from ACP, while fewer studies addressed initiating ACP discussions (n = 10) or documenting and sharing ACP information (n = 8). Among AI and machine learning models, logistic regression was the most frequent analytical method (n = 15). Most models (n = 28) demonstrated good to very good performance. However, concerns remain regarding data and code availability, as many studies lacked transparency and reproducibility (n = 17 and n = 36, respectively).

conclusionMost studies report models with promising results for predicting patient outcomes and supporting decision-making, but significant challenges remain, particularly regarding data and code availability. Future research should prioritize transparency and open-source code to facilitate rigorous evaluation. There is scope to explore novel AI-based approaches to ACP, including to support processes surrounding the review and updating of ACP information.

Indexed as

Advance Care PlanningArtificial IntelligenceHumansAdvance care planningArtificial intelligenceDigital toolsMachine learningPalliative care

Identifiers

PMID41131546
PMCPMC12548256

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.