↓ Skip to main content

When and how to discuss about palliative care and advance care planning with cancer patients: A mixed-methods study.

Overview of attention for article published in Palliative & Supportive Care, October 2023
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
19 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
7 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
When and how to discuss about palliative care and advance care planning with cancer patients: A mixed-methods study.
Published in
Palliative & Supportive Care, October 2023
DOI 10.1017/s1478951523001517
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fulvio Bergamo Trevizan, Carlos Eduardo Paiva, Laura Fiacadori de Almeida, Marco Antonio de Oliveira, Eduardo Bruera, Bianca Sakamoto Ribeiro Paiva

Abstract

To identify the patients who are most likely to participate in discussions about palliative care (PC) and advance care planning (ACP), and to determine their preferred timing and approach of discussion. The study included women aged 18-75 years diagnosed with breast cancer. In the quantitative phase, sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, knowledge, decision-making, and stigmas were evaluated. The qualitative phase included questions about patients' understanding, timing, and method of discussing PC and ACP, which were analyzed by Bardin's content analysis. In Phase 1, a total of 115 participants were included, with 53.04% completing both phases and 46.96% declining further participation. Those who completed both phases exhibited higher rates of marriage and educational attainment, while those who declined Phase 2 had a higher prevalence of advanced-stage cancer and palliative treatment. Completion of both phases was associated with a greater knowledge of reality and increased awareness of PC and ACP. Furthermore, the qualitative analysis revealed 5 convergent themes: timing, demystification, patient empowerment, misconception elimination, and open communication. These themes informed the development of a conceptual model that provides a framework for discussing PC and ACP with patients at different stages of cancer diagnosis and treatment, highlighting appropriate and inappropriate approaches and timing. Early discussion is beneficial, but withholding information or infringing on autonomy should be avoided. The study reveals that married and highly educated individuals tend to be more receptive to these discussions. However, patients with late-stage cancer tend to decline participation. Patients value open communication, demystification of PC, and empowering discussions that eliminate misunderstandings. Efforts should be made to reach patients with limited familiarity, particularly those with late-stage cancer, to increase their receptiveness to enable well-informed decision-making.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 19 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 7 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 7 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 2 29%
Researcher 1 14%
Other 1 14%
Unknown 3 43%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 2 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 29%
Unknown 3 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 February 2024.
All research outputs
#3,007,909
of 25,375,376 outputs
Outputs from Palliative & Supportive Care
#85
of 941 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,772
of 352,139 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Palliative & Supportive Care
#2
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,375,376 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 941 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 352,139 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.