Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41740167›Full record

ArticleJMIR research protocols2026

Cocreation of a Digital Tool for Proactive End-of-Life Communication: Protocol for a Participatory Action Research Project.

Malin Eneslätt, Charlèss Dupont, Eva Savolainen, Petter Fjällström, Ida Goliath

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR research protocols, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Malin EneslättDepartment of Health, Education and Technology, Luleå University of Technology, Universitetsvägen 16, Luleå, Norrbotten, 97187, Sweden, 46 920493924.ORCID 0000-0002-0050-4853
Charlèss DupontEnd-of-Life Care Research Group, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-8333-9573
Eva SavolainenDepartment of Health, Education and Technology, Luleå University of Technology, Universitetsvägen 16, Luleå, Norrbotten, 97187, Sweden, 46 920493924.ORCID 0000-0003-1970-0333
Petter FjällströmDepartment of Community Medicine and Rehabilitation, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0003-3503-7164
Ida GoliathDepartment of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0001-8245-5479

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Proactive end-of-life (EoL) conversations can help individuals, their significant others, and health care professionals be better prepared to confront dying and future EoL decision-making. Talking about EoL issues may be unfamiliar and difficult; tools are increasingly used to support such conversations. While using digital tools presents many advantages, the development processes of such are seldom robustly reported. The project outlined here has the overall aim of further developing and investigating promotion of early, proactive EoL conversations by cocreating and testing, together with potential community-based end users, a digital version of an existing tool, the DöBra cards. Objective: The aim of this paper is to outline the protocol for a funded participatory action research project, cocreating a digital tool for proactive EoL conversations, as well as reporting initial steps taken in the project. Methods: Project design is overall inspired by participatory action research and contains 2 work packages (WPs). WP A encompasses the iterative cocreation process of adapting the initial prototype into a relevant digital tool for the public in Sweden. WP B explores if and how the digital tool can support potential end users and significant others in proactive conversations about future EoL values and preferences. Digital tool development is inspired by a process map and will be conducted in collaborative groups. Data collection for both WPs includes repeated interviews with cocreation partners and meeting documentation. Data from field testing of the tool will encompass audiotaped think-aloud exercises, researchers' observations, usability data, and event log data. Analyses will be qualitative, quantitative, and to some extent mixed methods, and may include inductive thematic analyses, longitudinal qualitative analysis, and descriptive and inferential analyses. Results: Following funding and project start in January 2024, ethical approval was granted by the Swedish Ethical Review Authority. A stepwise recruitment strategy focusing on heterogeneity yielded an advisory group with 16 members from 13 organizations, representing broad segments of society despite some drop-off. The cocreation process, together with the advisory group, has produced a pilot version of the digital tool, which is currently being field tested. Since May 2025, 42 testers have been recruited. Data analysis is pending. The digital tool will be publicly launched in 2026, readily available, free of charge, and for anyone to use. Results will be disseminated at scientific conferences, in peer-reviewed journals, and through popular science communication. Conclusions: The cocreative process outlined in this protocol has the potential to develop a digital tool for proactive EoL conversations that is broadly used in the public by varied end users. The digital tool can thus reach new groups in society, potentially highlighting death as a natural part of life and reinforcing normalization of EoL conversations.

Indexed as

CommunicationTerminal CareHealth Services ResearchHumansResearch DesignSwedenadvance care planningcodevelopmentdigital technologyDöBraGo Wishparticipatory methods

Identifiers

PMID41740167
PMCPMC12935460

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.