ReviewCancers2026
Person-Centered Care in Glioblastoma: The Art of Early Advance Care Planning.
Review in Cancers, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Anti-Glioma Agents and Hyperbaric Oxygen for Prospective Therapeutic Approaches.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Nanomaterial-enhanced biosensors for traumatic brain injury biomarker detection: a review of analytical performance, machine learning integration, clinical validation, and point-of-care translation.Frontiers in neurology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Advance care planning (ACP) is fundamentally important for patients diagnosed with glioblastoma (GBM), a highly aggressive primary brain tumor with a grim prognosis. The urgency for early ACP is profoundly amplified by the characteristic, progressive neurocognitive decline that frequently impairs critical reasoning and leads to the loss of decisional capacity. ACP is a proactive process ensuring that future medical interventions align with a patient's deeply held values and goals. Proactive ACP discussions are associated with less aggressive end-of-life (EOL) care, improved quality of life for patients and care partners, earlier hospice enrollment, and reduced psychological distress for surrogate decision makers. Despite guidelines recommending early integration, ACP prevalence remains low due to clinician discomfort with EOL discussions, a perceived lack of adequate training, and a widespread "culture of shared avoidance". Experts recommend initiating ACP at or shortly after diagnosis, normalizing it as standard cancer care. Using structured communication strategies, such as the REMAP tool, and empowering allied health providers to champion these conversations are key integration strategies. Ultimately, early and skillful ACP is an ethical imperative that safeguards patient autonomy and minimizes the burden on loved ones.
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.