ArticleTumori2026
End-of-life decisions and opinions: Results of E.L.D.Y.-CA.RE study carried out at Veneto Institute of Oncology, Italy.
Article in Tumori, 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
backgroundIssues related to end-of-life decisions (ELDs) generate impassioned debates in society. Our study aimed at investigating attitudes in care of cancer patients at the end-of-life (EOL); ascertaining the opinion of healthcare professionals (HCPs), patients, and caregivers.
methodsAn anonymous and self-administered questionnaire was delivered to HCPs (physicians, nurses, psychologists, and social workers), patients and family caregivers at Veneto Institute of Oncology, Italy, and 425 questionnaires were collected (136 HCPs, 171 patients, 118 caregivers).
resultsWithholding life-sustaining treatment (LST) was declared by 11.3% of physicians and nurses and withdrawing by 19.4%, whereas 46.8% declared starting LST, and 48.4% did not discontinue LST. Most HCPs (75.7%) were in favor of patient's right to anticipate EOL, and 86.4% of withholding/withdrawing LST upon patient's request, with 62.4% HCPs agreeing on lethal drug doses to be allowed upon request of the patient. The majority (80.1%) disagreed that "
conclusionDespite the limitations imposed by the cross-sectional nature, this study adds information with regard to EOL in oncology setting in Italy. Our study shows that an attitude to prolonging patient's life in ELDs is still prevalent among HCPs in an Italian oncological setting, although there are signs of change. Communicating bad news emerges as an issue, along with HCPs' awareness that they need more education and training.
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.