ArticleCancer2026
Comparing the quality of dying for patients with hematological malignancy and solid tumors: A bereavement study in Japan.
Article in Cancer, 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAlthough research on palliative care in hematological malignancies has increased, research examining quality of death (QOD) and quality of care (QOC) in this population remains limited. This study compared QOD and QOC between patients with hematological malignancies and those with solid tumors.
methodsThe authors conducted a secondary analysis of a nationwide mortality follow-up survey of bereaved family members in Japan (2017-2018). The study included 3575 decedents with hematological malignancies and 50,592 with solid tumors. Propensity score matching was performed to adjust for demographic and clinical characteristics. QOD and QOC were assessed using the Good Death Inventory (GDI) and the Care Evaluation Scale 2.0 (CES). Bivariate analyses compared the matched groups.
resultsOverall, QOD and QOC were comparable between groups. However, among the GDI subdomains, patients with hematological malignancies had slightly lower scores for "good relationships with family" (mean difference, 0.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.03-0.3) and "preparation for death" (mean difference, 0.2; 95% CI, 0.04-0.3). In addition, patients with hematological malignancies were less likely to die in palliative care units than those with solid tumors (mean difference, 3.9%; 95% CI, 0.4%-7.4%).
conclusionsAlthough overall quality measures were similar, specific QOD domains related to family relationships and preparation for death were slightly lower among patients with hematological malignancies. These findings may reflect limited opportunities for end-of-life discussions due to the unpredictable and rapidly progressive course of hematological malignancies. Enhancing communication about prognosis and goals of care and early integration of palliative care may improve end-of-life experiences.
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.