ArticleBMC palliative care2026
Good death and end-of-life care preferences: perspectives from older Singaporeans.
Article in BMC palliative 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundReflecting on the rapidly ageing population with a growing need for end-of-life (EOL) care and ethnic diversity in Singapore, it is important to understand culturally specific views on the meaning of good death and end-of-life (EOL) care plans and preferences.
methodsThis study explores older Singaporeans' perspectives on the meaning of good death and their end-of-life (EOL) care plans and preferences, by conducting 18 in-depth interviews with older Singaporeans. The data was analysed using an iterative thematic analysis involving independent coding followed by iterative discussion and refinement of themes.
resultsWe found four attributes of good death, including being free of pain or suffering, not being a burden on family members, accepting mortality, and fulfilling parental and spousal responsibility. As regards EOL care plans and preferences, we found that most of the older adults interviewed never had an open and detailed EOL conversation with their family members. Four barriers to EOL care planning or preference discussions were identified: the degree of readiness, fear of making them unhappy, leaving it up to family, and interpersonal and social influence.
conclusionsTo encourage older adults to make EOL care plan while they are healthy and competent, we suggest that the government promote professionally appropriate and family-engaged EOL care services tailored towards individuals, and open and ongoing conversations between older adults and their family members.
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.