ArticleBMC palliative care2025
Chinese physicians' experiences with end-of-life communication and hospice care transition: a qualitative study with content analysis.
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.
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.
- Lonely boats swaying in the storm: experiences and supportive needs of adult only-children confronting parental end-of-life care: a qualitative study.BMC palliative care · 2026Article
- Patients as teachers: a qualitative study of spiritual care delivery experiences of senior healthcare providers in Taiwan.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of healthcare professionals regarding palliative care family meetings: a multicenter cross-sectional study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMainland China's end-of-life care system remained underdeveloped marked by underutilization of hospice care services. Physicians-initiated end-of-life communication is likely to result in immediate enrollment in hospice care. However, there is a lack of empirical evidence on how physicians in China undertake end-of-life communication in advanced cancer. This qualitative study aimed to explore physicians' experiences on discussing end-of-life matters and facilitating hospice care transition within families of patients with advanced cancer.
methodsA descriptive qualitative study was conducted. Using the purpose sampling, physicians were recruited from 8 hospitals in Shanghai, China. Physicians were eligible if they had experiences in treating patients with advanced cancer and were ineligible if they did not directly participate in end-of-life discussions with patients/families. Semi-structured interviews were conducted from August 2022 to February 2023. Qualitative data were analyzed by content analysis approach.
resultsAmong 18 physicians, three major themes emerged regarding barriers to effective end-of-life communication at physician, family, and system levels: (1) Physician avoidance in disclosing terminal prognosis: Prognostic uncertainty, Skill deficiency, Emotional burden, Concerns about therapeutic hope, and Systematic avoidance; (2) Family priority in end-of-life decision-making: Complex family dynamics, Cultural stigma, and Unstructured family coping; (3) Systematic fragmentation in hospice care integration: Limited awareness and understanding, Ineffective referral mechanisms, and Insufficient leadership support.
conclusionEnd-of-life communication in Shanghai is hindered by physician challenges, cultural norms favoring family decisions, and systemic gaps. Targeted training for non-hospice physicians, balanced approaches to patient autonomy and family roles, and strengthened referral/reimbursement policies are needed to improve hospice transitions.
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.