ArticlePalliative & supportive care2026
Development and expert consensus validation of a technological resource to support the integration of palliative care from hospital to home: A Delphi study.
Article in Palliative & supportive care, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe effective integration of palliative care along the hospital-home trajectory remains a challenge, with digital technologies representing a promising strategy to improve continuity and coordination of care. This study aimed to validate, through expert consensus, the objectives, functionalities, clinical content, organizational requirements, and barriers and facilitators of a technological resource to support the integration of palliative care from hospital to home.
methodsA methodological consensus study using a modified Delphi technique was conducted over two rounds. A multidisciplinary panel of experts with experience in palliative care, digital health, and healthcare organization participated. In the first round, experts evaluated an initial set of items derived from the literature and clinical practice. Items were analyzed for consensus and, based on qualitative comments, linguistically refined. In the second round, experts reassessed the items to confirm consensus and evaluate the stability of responses. A 4-point Likert scale was used. Consensus was defined as ≥75% of responses indicating "Agree" or "Strongly agree," with calculation of the Item Content Validity Index (I-CVI) and the coefficient of variation.
resultsThirty-three experts participated in both rounds, corresponding to a 100% retention rate. All items reached consensus in the first round and maintained consensus and high stability in the second round. Agreement levels were high across all domains, with I-CVI values ≥0.78 and coefficients of variation below 0.25, confirming the content validity of the final set of items. No items were excluded throughout the Delphi process. SIGNIFICANCE OF
resultsThis study validated a comprehensive and structured set of essential components for the development of a technological resource to support the integration of palliative care from hospital to home. The high levels of consensus and stability achieved support the clinical and organizational relevance of the resource, providing a solid foundation for its development, implementation, and future evaluation.
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.