ArticleCancer medicine2026
Differences in Perspectives and Policies Regarding End-of-Life Care Between Hematologists and Gastroenterologists.
Article in Cancer medicine, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatients with hematologic malignancies often receive aggressive treatment until the terminal phase and transition to end-of-life (EOL) care less frequently than those with solid tumors. A 2015 survey compared hematologists' and solid tumor-oncologists' attitudes toward EOL care, revealing differences. A decade later, no similar reports have appeared despite therapeutic advances. Therefore, we repeated the survey with additional questions to examine whether perspectives on EOL care have changed.
methodsA 50-item questionnaire was administered to hematologists and gastroenterologists. Responses came from 121 hematologists treating hematologic cancers, 141 gastroenterologists treating gastrointestinal cancer including eight medical oncologists managing both. For analysis, hematologists were compared with 141 gastroenterologists.
resultsIn both groups, refractory to standard therapy for cancer was the leading reason for initiating EOL care, with no significant differences. However, hematologists were less likely to transition ≥ 21% of patients to EOL care (p < 0.0001), more likely to register relapsed or refractory patients in clinical trials (p < 0.0001), to administer therapy to patients with 1-month expected survival and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 4 (p < 0.0001), and to cite barriers such as limited transfusions and restrictions on referrals to palliative care wards (p < 0.0001).
conclusionsHematologists' continuation of therapy in terminal patients and difficulty referring to palliative wards persisted since 2015, indicating unchanged attitudes. Additional findings confirmed reliance on clinical trials, and emphasis on transfusions, which may hinder timely EOL transitions in hematologic malignancies.
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.