Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 276

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 47 of the 47 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Advance care planning for cancer patients: a systematic review of perceptions and experiences of patients, families, and healthcare providers

Open access
Johnson, Stephanie, Butow, Phyllis, Kerridge, Ian, Tattersall, Martin·2016·Psycho-Oncology
DOI 10.1002/pon.3926
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Background: Patients with advanced cancer may benefit from end of life (EOL) planning, but there is evidence that their willingness and desire to engage in advance care planning (ACP) varies. The reasons for this remain poorly understood. Previous reviews on ACP most commonly report outcome measures related to medical interventions and type of care. Synthesis of the literature, which aims to illuminate the salient characteristics of ACP and investigates the psychological and social features of preparation for the EOL, is required. Methods: We searched Medline, EMBASE, PsychINFO, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for studies on perceptions or experiences regarding ACP of adults with cancer, family, friends, or professionals caring for this group. Databases were searched from earliest records to 19 November 2014. A thematic analysis of the literature generated conceptual themes. Results: Of the 2483 studies identified, 40 were eligible for inclusion. Studies addressed the relational nature of ACP, fear surrounding ACP, the conceptual complexity of autonomy, and the influence of institutional culture and previous healthcare experiences on ACP. Conclusions: The complex social and emotional environments within which EOL planning is initiated and actioned are not sufficiently embedded within standardized ACP. The notion that ACP is concerned principally with the ‘right’ to self‐determination through control over treatment choices at the EOL may misrepresent the way that ACP actually occurs in cancer care and ultimately conflict with the deeper concerns and needs of patients, who experience ACP as relational, emotional, and social. Copyright © 2015 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.3926

Cites

47 of 47 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

1 retracted

Show all 47 references

Research works printed but not linked: 13

  1. Robinson C, 2011, Advance care planning: re‐visioning our ethical approach, Can J Nurs Res, 43, 18
  2. Scott I, 2013, Clinical focus: difficult but necessary conversations—the case for advance care planning, Med J Aust, 199
  3. The SUPPORT Principal Investigators, 1995, A controlled trial to improve care for seriously ill hospitalized patients. The Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatments (SUPPORT), JAMA, 274
  4. 10.1007/s00520-012-1394-y · doi:10.1007/s00520-012-1394-y
  5. 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2011.12.003 · doi:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2011.12.003
  6. 10.1089/10966210360510127 · doi:10.1089/10966210360510127
  7. 10.1016/S1548-5315(11)70622-2 · doi:10.1016/s1548-5315(11)70622-2
  8. Almack K, 2010, Communication strategies to initiate conversations planning for end of life care (EOLC), Palliat Med, 24
  9. 10.1111/1744-1609.12011 · doi:10.1111/1744-1609.12011
  10. 10.1016/j.ygyno.2011.09.029 · doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2011.09.029
  11. 10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.02.011 · doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.02.011
  12. 10.1017/S0963180102113090 · doi:10.1017/s0963180102113090
  13. Auriemma C, 2014, Stability of end‐of‐life preferences: a systematic review of the evidence, JAMA, 174, 1085

Cited by

See all 276

Metadata

Authors
Johnson, S., Butow, P., Kerridge, I., & Tattersall, M.
Venue
Psycho-Oncology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-09-20
Volume
25
Issue
4
Pages
362-386
ISSN
  • 1057-9249 (ISSN-L)
  • 1099-1611
DOI
10.1002/pon.3926
OpenAlex
W1897836850
Cited by
276
References
47
FWCI
1.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor)

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: Advance care planning for cancer patients: a systematic review of perceptions and experiences of patients, families, and healthcare providers. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/pon.3926
The paper
Johnson, S., Butow, P., Kerridge, I., & Tattersall, M. (2016). Advance care planning for cancer patients: a systematic review of perceptions and experiences of patients, families, and healthcare providers. Psycho-Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.3926

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.