4.6 Review

Preferences about place of end-of-life care and death of patients with life-threatening illnesses and their families: a protocol for an umbrella review

期刊

BMJ OPEN
卷 13, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-066374

关键词

PALLIATIVE CARE; Paediatric palliative care; Adult palliative care; Protocols & guidelines; Paediatric palliative care

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This protocol describes a review that aims to examine and synthesize existing evidence regarding preferences about end-of-life care and death location in patients with life-threatening illnesses and their families. The review will involve searching for relevant systematic reviews, extracting data, and assessing quality. The results will be presented at conferences and published in a peer-reviewed journal.
IntroductionFor most of history, the majority of people died at home surrounded by family. However, the global scenario has progressively changed towards hospital death and more recently in some countries back again towards home, with indication that COVID-19 may have further increased the number of home deaths. It is therefore timely to establish the state-of-the-art about people's preferences for place of end-of-life care and death, to understand the full spectrum of preferences, nuances and commonalities worldwide. This protocol describes the methods for an umbrella review which aims to examine and synthesise the available evidence regarding preferences about place of end-of-life care and death of patients with life-threatening illnesses and their families.Methods and analysisWe will search for relevant systematic reviews (quantitative and/or qualitative) in six databases from inception without language restrictions: PsycINFO, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PROSPERO and Epistemonikos. Following the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology for umbrella reviews, eligibility screening, data extraction and quality assessment (using the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist) will be done by two independent reviewers. We will report the screening process using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses flow diagram. Study double-counting will be reported using the Graphical Representation of Overlap for OVErviews tool. A narrative synthesis will include 'Summary of Evidence' tables to address five review questions (distribution of preferences and reasons, influencing variables, place of care vs place of death, changes over time, congruence between preferred and actual places), grading the evidence on each question using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) and/or GRADE-Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research.Ethics and disseminationThis review does not require ethical approval. The results will be presented at conferences and published in a peer-reviewed journal.PROSPERO registration number CRD42022339983.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据