ArticleBMJ open2026
Adapting and implementing the Serious Illness Care Programme for outpatient oncology, cardiology and palliative medicine clinics: a mixed-methods feasibility study.
Article in BMJ open, 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
objectivesTo evaluate the feasibility of implementing a coordinator-facilitated Serious Illness Care Programme (SICP) in outpatient oncology, cardiology and palliative medicine clinics.
designSingle-arm, mixed-methods, prospective feasibility study conducted over three sequential phases across 9 months, guided by the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance framework.
settingOutpatient oncology, cardiology and palliative medicine clinics in two tertiary medical centres in Singapore.
participantsEleven clinicians (eight doctors and three nurses) participated. Clinicians had prior serious illness conversation (SIC) training and were purposively sampled for diversity in specialty, seniority and mode of care delivery. One participant disengaged midway due to concerns about intervention fit but completed endline measures. A total of 101 patients participated in an SIC during the intervention period.
interventionsImplementation supports were developed with reference to the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation-Behaviour model of behaviour change, and adapted to the workflows and needs of participating clinicians. These included email reminders, in-person prompting by a coordinator, access to a locally adapted SIC guide, a structured documentation template and optional patient preparation materials. Supports were introduced in full during phase 2, with in-person prompting and support withdrawn in phase 3. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Feasibility was the primary outcome, operationalised through clinician perceptions of implementation support (acceptability) and the proportionality of implementation effort to observed benefits (practicality). Secondary outcomes included SIC engagement rates (reach), clinician retention (adoption) and continuity intentions among clinicians (maintenance).
resultsClinician retention was 91% (n=10/11) with the only dropout being in the cardiology setting. Most clinicians felt support was acceptable and adequate (n=9/11). While 101 patients had SICs, engagement activity in oncology and cardiology declined following the withdrawal of in-person prompting, while engagement among palliative medicine clinicians remained stable or increased. Coordinator time commitment decreased by 75.8% between phases 2 and 3. Key barriers faced by clinicians included the documentation burden. Additionally, there was a perceived lack of fit in outpatient cardiology.
conclusionsA coordinator-facilitated SICP is feasible and acceptable in outpatient oncology and palliative care settings. Active coordination reduces clinician burden. As in-person prompting may be necessary to sustain engagement in non-palliative specialties, further research should focus on institutionalising supports in these settings.
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.