ArticleFrontiers in health services2025
Using an implementation science approach to enhance advance care planning practice: a community case study.
Article in Frontiers in health services, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Defining Advance Care Planning and Identifying Quality Indicators: A Case Study on Key Stakeholders' Perspectives in Singapore.Palliative medicine reportsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The process of advance care planning (ACP) can educate and prepare patients and caregivers to make better in-the-moment end of life decisions. Two nationwide studies on ACP implementation in Singapore identified gaps and barriers across various ACP practice settings, contributing to low ACP up-take and completion rates. This case study describes the key steps on how stakeholders were engaged and supported development of a quality practice guideline for ACP implementation. A knowledge exchange platform was convened through a multi-level partnership to form a workgroup tasked to translate evidence and develop quality ACP practice guidelines. Key knowledge users such as ACP implementers were engaged throughout the Knowledge-to-Action (KTA) action-cycle phase completing various associated tasks, including an e-survey conducted to prioritize barriers identified from the nationwide studies and other relevant evaluations. Prioritized barriers and their mapped Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) were linked with relevant intervention functions and their associated implementation strategies, then contextualized into potential local applications by the workgroup. The implementation strategies were grouped into broader categories that formed domains in the practice guideline. The last action phase was engagement with ACP teams across various organizations to conduct pilot studies using implementation strategies that would facilitate quality implementation of ACP. Our quality guideline development process was supported by the KTA model that is iterative in nature with action-phases operationalized through a multi-level partnership. This is a novel approach to formulate a national quality practice guideline with lessons learned that could be applied to others pursuing similar endeavors.
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.