International palliative care research in the context of global development: a systematic mapping review

Clark, Joseph; Gardiner, Clare; Barnes, Amy

doi:10.1136/bmjspcare-2015-001008

Cited by 49 publications

(52 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this review, the majority of priority setting exercises were conducted in countries with an preliminary (i.e., New Zealand) or advanced (i.e., UK, Ireland, U.S.A, Canada and Australia) level of palliative care programmes and integration into mainstream health services [65]. A gap in the knowledge of priorities representing those in lower and middleincome countries (LMIC) exists, echoing previous reviews of international palliative care research [66,67]. Whilst there is evidence in this review of engagement, with researchers from high-income regions collaborating and undertaking research in Africa (Powell et al, 2014), a number of researchers [31,67] suggest this raises multi-faceted challenges including the risk of imposing western norms in differing cultural contexts [68].…”

Section: What Is Already Known and What Does This Review Addmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…A gap in the knowledge of priorities representing those in lower and middleincome countries (LMIC) exists, echoing previous reviews of international palliative care research [66,67]. Whilst there is evidence in this review of engagement, with researchers from high-income regions collaborating and undertaking research in Africa (Powell et al, 2014), a number of researchers [31,67] suggest this raises multi-faceted challenges including the risk of imposing western norms in differing cultural contexts [68]. Therefore, the application of western research priority findings is limited, if not adapted to the specific economic, cultural and specific health care context and constraints of lower-and middle-income countries.…”

Section: What Is Already Known and What Does This Review Addmentioning

confidence: 96%

See 1 more Smart Citation

International palliative care research priorities: A systematic review

Hasson¹,

Nicholson

Muldrew³

et al. 2020

BMC Palliat Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: There has been increasing evidence and debate on palliative care research priorities and the international research agenda. To date, however, there is a lack of synthesis of this evidence, examining commonalities, differences, and gaps. To identify and synthesize literature on international palliative care research priorities originating from Western countries mapped to a quality assessment framework. Methods: A systematic review of several academic and grey databases were searched from January 2008-June 2019 for studies eliciting research priorities in palliative care in English. Two researchers independently reviewed, critically appraised, and conducted data extraction and synthesis. Results: The search yielded 10,235 articles (academic databases, n = 4108; grey literature, n = 6127), of which ten were included for appraisal and review. Priority areas were identified: service models; continuity of care; training and education; inequality; communication; living well and independently; and recognising family/carer needs and the importance of families. Methodological approaches and process of reporting varied. There was little representation of patient and caregiver driven agendas. The priorities were mapped to the Donabedian framework for assessing quality reflecting structure, process and outcomes and key priority areas. Conclusions: Limited evidence exists pertaining to research priorities across palliative care. Whilst a broad range of topics were elicited, approaches and samples varied questioning the credibility of findings. The voice of the care provider dominated, calling for more inclusive means to capture the patient and family voice. The findings of this study may serve as a template to understand the commonalities of research, identify gaps, and extend the palliative care research agenda.

show abstract

Section: What Is Already Known and What Does This Review Addmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: What Is Already Known and What Does This Review Addmentioning

confidence: 96%

International palliative care research priorities: A systematic review

Hasson¹,

Nicholson

Muldrew³

et al. 2020

BMC Palliat Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this review, the majority of priority setting exercises were conducted in countries with an preliminary (i.e., (66,67). Whilst there is evidence in this review of engagement, with researchers from high-income regions collaborating and undertaking research in Africa (Powell et al, 2014), a number of researchers (31,67) suggest this raises multi-faceted challenges including the risk of imposing western norms in differing cultural contexts (68). Therefore, the application of western research priority findings is limited, if not adapted to the specific economic, cultural and specific health care context and constraints of lower-and middle-income countries.…”

Section: What Is Already Known and What Does This Review Addmentioning

confidence: 99%

International Palliative Care Research Priorities: A Systematic Review

Hasson

Nicholson

Muldrew

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: There has been increasing evidence and debate on palliative care research priorities and the international research agenda. To date, however, there is a lack of synthesis of this evidence, examining commonalities, differences, and gaps. To identify and synthesize literature on international palliative care research priorities originating from Western countries mapped to a quality assessment framework.Methods: A systematic review of several academic and grey databases were searched from January 2008- June 2019 for studies eliciting research priorities in palliative care in English. Two researchers independently reviewed, critically appraised, and conducted data extraction and synthesis.Results: The search yielded 10,235 articles (academic databases, n = 4108; grey literature, n = 6127), of which ten were included for appraisal and review. Priority areas were identified: service models; continuity of care; training and education; inequality; communication; living well and independently; and recognising family/carer needs and the importance of families. Methodological approaches and process of reporting varied. There was little representation of patient and caregiver driven agendas. The priorities were mapped to the Donabedian framework for assessing quality reflecting structure, process and outcomes and key priority areas.Conclusions: Limited evidence exists pertaining to research priorities across palliative care. Whilst a broad range of topics were elicited, approaches and samples varied questioning the credibility of findings. The voice of the care provider dominated, calling for more inclusive means to capture the patient and family voice. The findings of this study may serve as a template to understand the commonalities of research, identify gaps, and extend the palliative care research agenda.

show abstract

“…International palliative care and palliative care research has increased over the past 10–15 years .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Professionals’ experiences with palliative care and collaboration in relation to a randomised clinical trial: a qualitative interview study

Raunkiær

Buch

Holm-Petersen

et al. 2019

Scandinavian Caring Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scand J Caring Sci; 2020; 34: 305-313 Professionals' experiences with palliative care and collaboration in relation to a randomised clinical trial: a qualitative interview study Background: International evidence on the outcome of generalist versus specialist palliative care provision in palliative care trajectories is limited and varied. In general, intervention studies can influence the organisation of palliative care practice and professional collaborations. However, randomised clinical trials in palliative care rarely consider the organisational significance of the studies, as experienced by the professionals involved. DOMUS is the abbreviation for a Danish intervention study designed as a randomised clinical trial, investigating an accelerated transition from oncological to specialist palliative care at home for patients with incurable cancer. Alongside conducting the palliative care intervention study, we wanted to discover the perspectives of the healthcare professionals involved. Aim: To explore the organisational significance of the DOMUS intervention study as experienced by the professionals involved. Design: A qualitative interview study, using thematic content analysis and inspired by organisational theory.Setting/participants: Thirty-eight professionals from four units involved in the DOMUS intervention study took part in 10 groups and six individual interviews. Results: The DOMUS randomised clinical trial intervention influenced and sometimes disrupted both the ways of organising, collaborating and practising palliative care, and patients' and relatives' understanding of their own situation. It did this by (1) referring a broader palliative care target group to specialist palliative care, leading to (2) different palliative care needs, professional tasks, and perceived impact on (3) the organisation of palliative care and (4) professional collaboration. Conclusion: Professionals involved in the DOMUS palliative care intervention found that the study had organisational significance, with an influence on professionals, patients and relatives. Specialist palliative care in Denmark is devoted organisationally and professionally to patients with severe or complex palliative care needs. Hence, new ways of organising palliative care for people in the earlier stages of their disease are needed.

show abstract

International palliative care research in the context of global development: a systematic mapping review

Cited by 49 publications

References 43 publications

International palliative care research priorities: A systematic review

International palliative care research priorities: A systematic review

International Palliative Care Research Priorities: A Systematic Review

Professionals’ experiences with palliative care and collaboration in relation to a randomised clinical trial: a qualitative interview study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About