ArticleBMC palliative care2026
Healthcare professionals' conceptualizations of palliative care and readiness for early integration: a cross‑sectional mixed‑methods survey in Finland.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEarly integration of palliative care for patients with advanced cancer is recommended by major organizations and guidelines, yet palliative care is often still perceived as end-of-life care or as incompatible with active oncological treatment. Such misconceptions may delay timely integration.
methodsWe conducted a cross-sectional mixed-methods survey among healthcare professionals in oncology services in Ostrobothnia, Finland. The survey included 15 Likert-scale statements (1-5) addressing perceived knowledge, values and role beliefs, and perceived capacity and support, plus one free-text question: "What is palliative care?". Likert responses were summarized descriptively and compared across demographic groups using non-parametric tests. Free-text responses were coded using a predefined framework of 25 themes derived from the WHO definition of palliative care and Finnish national quality recommendations, generating a binary concept-coverage score (0-25). Responses were also classified for an end-of-life/non-concurrent conceptualization ("non-concurrent framing"). Group differences in concept-coverage scores were tested using Mann-Whitney U.
resultsNinety-six professionals completed the survey (response rate 88.1%); 95 responded to the free-text item. While participants strongly endorsed statements about palliative care benefits and values, endorsement was lower for perceived competence and lowest for resources and support. Nearly one-third of participants expressed a non-concurrent/end-of-life framing of palliative care in their free-text definition. Concept-coverage scores were significantly lower among participants with non-concurrent framing compared with those without, particularly framework categories related to practical factors and system-level drivers.
conclusionThe open-ended responses indicated variability in the conceptualization of palliative care, including descriptions consistent with an end-of-life or non-concurrent view. This pattern identifies a potential target for education and implementation aligned with national guidance and quality recommendations.
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.