Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorHasson, Felicity
dc.contributor.authorNicholson, Emma
dc.contributor.authorMuldrew, Deborah
dc.contributor.authorBamidele, Olufikayo
dc.contributor.authorPayne, Sheila
dc.contributor.authorMcIlfatrick, Sonja
dc.date.accessioned2021-10-13T11:58:21Z
dc.date.available2021-10-13T11:58:21Z
dc.date.issued2020-02-03
dc.identifier.pmid32013949
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s12904-020-0520-8
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10147/630584
dc.descriptionBackground: 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.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.subjectconsensusen_US
dc.subjectInternational. Systematic reviewen_US
dc.subjectPALLIATIVE CAREen_US
dc.subjectresearch prioritiesen_US
dc.titleInternational palliative care research priorities: A systematic review.en_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.typeOtheren_US
dc.identifier.eissn1472-684X
dc.identifier.journalBMC palliative careen_US
dc.source.journaltitleBMC palliative care
dc.source.volume19
dc.source.issue1
dc.source.beginpage16
dc.source.endpage
refterms.dateFOA2021-10-13T11:58:22Z
dc.source.countryEngland


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
s12904-020-0520-8.pdf
Size:
1.083Mb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record