Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 328

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Sustaining hope when communicating with terminally ill patients and their families: a systematic review

Clayton, Josephine M., Hancock, Karen, Parker, Sharon, Butow, Phyllis N., Walder, Sharon, Carrick, Sue, Currow, David, Ghersi, Davina, Glare, Paul, Hagerty, Rebecca, Olver, Ian N., Tattersall, Martin H. N.·2008·Psycho-Oncology

Abstract

The aim of this systematic review was to examine studies that have investigated sustaining hope during prognostic and end‐of‐life issues discussions with terminally ill patients and their families. A comprehensive search of databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsychINFO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) and handsearching, from 1985 to June 2006, identified 27 studies. This review suggests that the issues surrounding hope in this context are complex. Despite the lack of unanimity among researchers regarding the definition of hope, findings suggest that balancing hope with honesty is an important skill for health professionals (HPs). Many patients seem to be able to maintain a sense of hope despite acknowledging the terminal nature of their illness. Patients and caregivers mostly preferred honest and accurate information, provided with empathy and understanding. Many different sources of hope were identified in this context in broad aspects of life, not just the medical situation. HPs need to recognize this spectrum of hope and appreciate that patients may simultaneously hope for ‘cure’ while acknowledging the terminal nature of their illness. HPs may help patients to cope with their terminal prognosis by exploring and fostering realistic forms of hope that are meaningful for the particular patient and their family. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/pon.1288

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Cited by

See all 328

Metadata

Authors
Clayton, J. M., Hancock, K., Parker, S., Butow, P. N., Walder, S., Carrick, S., Currow, D., Ghersi, D., Glare, P., Hagerty, R., Olver, I. N., & Tattersall, M. H. N.
Venue
Psycho-Oncology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2007-11-16
Volume
17
Issue
7
Pages
641-659
ISSN
  • 1057-9249 (ISSN-L)
  • 1099-1611
OpenAlex
W2153753691
Cited by
328
References
3
FWCI
1.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Sustaining hope when communicating with terminally ill patients and their families: a systematic review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/pon.1288
The paper
Clayton, J. M., Hancock, K., Parker, S., Butow, P. N., Walder, S., Carrick, S., Currow, D., Ghersi, D., Glare, P., Hagerty, R., Olver, I. N., & Tattersall, M. H. N. (2008). Sustaining hope when communicating with terminally ill patients and their families: a systematic review. Psycho-Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.1288

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.