ArticleBMC health services research2026
Digital health in palliative care: use is largely limited to conventional technologies - a cross-sectional survey of healthcare professionals.
Article in BMC health services research, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDigital health technologies (DHTs) can help address challenges in palliative care, particularly in rural and underserved areas. However, evidence on their routine use and acceptance among healthcare professionals (HCPs) remains limited.
aimTo assess HCPs reported use of DHTs, digital health literacy, attitudes, and perceived benefits and barriers regarding DHT implementation in routine palliative care.
designCross-sectional survey using a self-administered questionnaire informed by prior qualitative research. Data were collected online and on paper (Sept-Nov 2023). SETTING/
participants152 HCPs in palliative care across Brandenburg, Germany: 68 physicians, 36 nurses, and 48 others (e.g. psycho-oncologists, social workers).
resultsPhysicians showed the highest digital health literacy (mean eHEALS: 33/40). Nurses expressed the highest general agreement with DHTs, though acceptance in palliative care was lower-especially among physicians. Email (72-78%) and documentation tools (60-67%) were widely used. Innovative tools such as video consultations (6%), mobile apps (10-22%), and wearables (10-22%) were used infrequently. Perceived benefits included location flexibility (up to 81%) and time independence (up to 78%). Barriers included inadequate infrastructure (up to 78%) and limited digital skills among patients and families (up to 80%). DHT use was more frequent in inpatient settings (ρ = 0.183, p = 0.014), urban areas (p = 0.04), and among physicians and nurses (p = 0.049). Non-users had a higher median age than users (p = 0.023). Those using conventional tools were more likely to adopt innovative ones (p < 0.001).
conclusionsDHT use in palliative care remains centered on conventional tools. While professionals recognize potential benefits, structural deficits and limited perceived relevance hinder adoption. Strengthening infrastructure and digital literacy is key to sustainable digital transformation.
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.