ArticlePalliative care and social practice2026
Article in Palliative care and social practice, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Structured clinical records are essential for ensuring the quality and continuity of palliative care, particularly in socially vulnerable contexts. Existing digital systems rarely capture psychosocial or subjective data, limiting interdisciplinary collaboration and person-centered care planning. Objective: To describe the development and preliminary usability assessment of Method: This methodological study was conducted between 2022 and 2025, adopting an agile development approach grounded in the Scrum framework and guided by user-centered design principles. The platform was implemented as a responsive web system with secure authentication mechanisms, interoperability through REST (Representational State Transfer) application programming interfaces, and modules integrating standardized palliative care assessment tools. Usability assessment was conducted prospectively between February 2024 and January 2025 within the Results: By January 2025, the system had generated 520 clinical records used by 71 interdisciplinary health professionals involved in community-based palliative care. Three analytical categories emerged: (1) routine use, (2) challenges related to features and user diversity, and (3) contextual adjustments. These findings indicate that the platform became embedded in routine home-based care activities, although its use varied depending on users' familiarity with digital tools. Iterative refinements included simplified and extended versions, reorganized navigation flows, and automated referral features. Conclusion:
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.