Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42455280›Full record

ReviewJournal of bioethical inquiry2026

The Ethical and Psychosocial Dimensions of Palliative Care in Prison : A Scoping Review.

Ana Gehl-Costa, P Reis-Pina

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of bioethical inquiry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Ana Gehl-CostaFaculdade de Medicina da Universidade de Lisboa, Avenida Professor Egas Moniz, 1649-028, Lisboa, Portugal.
P Reis-PinaFaculdade de Medicina da Universidade de Lisboa, Avenida Professor Egas Moniz, 1649-028, Lisboa, Portugal. paulopina@medicina.ulisboa.pt.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWith prison populations expanding and aging, palliative care (PC) is an urgent concern. People in prison (PIP) face chronic illness, mental health conditions, and social vulnerabilities, creating ethical and psychosocial challenges to dignified end-of-life (EOL) care.

objectiveThis scoping review mapped key ethical and psychosocial domains in the provision of PC in prisons.

methodsPubMed, Web of Science, and ScienceDirect were searched using the strategy: Population-individuals in prison; Concept-ethical and/or psychosocial issues in PC; Context-PC provision in prisons across regions and healthcare models. Data were coded inductively, organized into ethical and psychosocial domains, and synthesized narratively.

resultsSixteen studies were included, mainly conceptual analyses (n=10), most from North America (n=11). Ethical domains included structural neglect of PIP with life-limiting illness, barriers to compassionate release, compromised autonomy, denial of death in prison culture, and inadequacies in care quality and access. Psychosocial domains encompassed stigma, mistrust, isolation, existential suffering, and fractured social bonds. PIP-led hospice models offered companionship but raised tensions around labour, confidentiality, and the normalization of death in custody.

conclusionPrison-based PC requires systemic reforms, staff training, family and advocacy involvement, and legal safeguards to ensure equitable, compassionate, and dignified EOL care.

Indexed as

Bioethical issuesCorrectional institutionsEnd-of-life careEthical dilemmasPalliative carePrisonPrisonersPsychosocial functioningScoping review

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.