Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41320208›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2025

Identifying triggers for optimal timing of advance care planning in electronic primary health care records: a nested case-control study.

Willemijn Tros, Jenny van der Steen, Mattijs E Numans, Marta Fiocco, Petra G van Peet

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. 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

5 authors.

Willemijn TrosPublic Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands w.tros@lumc.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7231-316X
Jenny van der SteenPublic Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Mattijs E NumansPublic Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Marta FioccoMathematical Institute, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Petra G van PeetPublic Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo explore whether routine electronic healthcare records can be used to identify triggers for initiating advance care planning (ACP) and the optimal time window to initiate ACP. We aimed to assess the prevalence of triggers for initiating ACP as defined for use in routine data, whether their presence is associated with death, and what their position is relative to a previously identified 'optimal time window for ACP'.

designNested case-control study within a large dynamic population cohort dataset.

settingPrimary care population-based, anonymised data extracted from GP centres in the South Holland province, The Netherlands.

participantsWe selected records of individuals aged ≥65 registered with their general practice from 1 Jan 2014 to 1 Jan 2017. Cases were individuals who died between 1 Jan 2017 and 1 Jan 2020. Controls were individuals who remained alive. Cases were matched by age to controls in a 1:4 ratio.

main outcome measuresOutcomes include prevalence of triggers for ACP in the records of deceased and living individuals; association of the triggers' presence with death; timing of the identified triggers in deceased individuals relative to the 'optimal time window for ACP'.

resultsWe included 17098 records, 4139 from deceased individuals (mean age 81) and 12959 from living individuals (mean age 79). Triggers most strongly associated with death were consultations concerning malignancy (OR 8.35, 95% CI 7.42 to 9.41), hospital admissions (OR 7.32, 95% CI 6.75 to 7.94), emergency department referrals (OR 7.11, 95% CI 6.52 to 7.75), registered home visits (OR 5.97, 95% CI 5.51 to 6.47), consultations concerning heart failure (OR 5.25, 95% CI 4.59 to 5.99), dementia (OR 4.75, 95% CI 3.99 to 6.56), opioid prescriptions (OR 4.58 (4.25-4.93), consultations concerning general decline/feeling old (OR 4.15, 95% CI 3.72 to 4.64) and skin ulcers/pressure sores (OR 4.04, 95% CI 3.55 to 4.61). Those closest to the median of the optimal time window for ACP were consultations regarding dyspnoea, general decline/feeling old, heart failure, skin ulcers/pressure sores and fever, opioid prescriptions, emergency department referrals, registered home visits and hospital admissions.

conclusionsClinical triggers for initiating ACP in general practice can be recognised within the routine electronic health records and they align well with the 'window of opportunity' to initiate ACP.

Indexed as

Advance Care PlanningElectronic Health RecordsPrimary Health CareAgedAged, 80 and overCase-Control StudiesFemaleHumansMaleNetherlandsTime FactorsAgedClinical Decision-MakingElectronic Health RecordsFrail ElderlyPALLIATIVE CAREPrimary Care

Identifiers

PMID41320208
PMCPMC12666204

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.