ArticlePloS one2026
What is the appropriate timing for advance care planning according to patients and their relatives? A scoping review.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAdvance care planning (ACP) is often initiated in the last phase of life. However, patients and relatives may need earlier conversations about their care preferences in the disease trajectory.
objectiveTo synthesize empirical research on the appropriate timing of ACP from the perspective of patients and relatives. Additionally, we investigated facilitators, challenges, and triggers related to that timing. DESIGN AND
methodA scoping review was conducted using PubMed and CINAHL databases (up to April 2023; updated June 2025). Eligible studies focused on ACP timing from the perspectives of patients with cancer, heart or lung disease, and relatives. Two researchers independently screened papers and extracted data. Extracted data were clustered using thematic analysis. Results: In total, 29 papers were included. Both patients' and relatives' perspectives regarding the appropriate timing of initiating ACP varied widely and encompassed the entire continuum from healthy state, through illness, until the end of life. Timing related facilitating factors for initiating ACP were: clear information about prognosis, readiness, ACP as part of standard care, and clarity about who initiates ACP. Timing challenges were categorized as patient- (individual needs, coping, mutual protection), illness- (prognosis or illness related uncertainty) and professional-related (reluctance, time constraints). Additionally, patient-related (age, experiences in life) and trigger points in illness were identified.
conclusionThe wide range of perspectives regarding appropriate timing of ACP requires a personalized approach. Clinical triggers may provide guidance, though they are not universally applicable. Professionals should timely and regularly explore patients' preferences and readiness for initiating ACP conversations.
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.