Cited by 100Palliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesPatient-Provider Communication in HealthcareEthics and bioethics in healthcare

Assessing end-of-life preferences for advanced dementia in rural patients using an educational video: a randomized controlled trial

Volandes, Angelo E., Ferguson, Laurie Anne, Davis, Aretha D., Hull, Nathan C., Green, Michael J., Chang, Yuchiao, Deep, Kristy, Paasche-Orlow, Michael K.·2011·Journal of Palliative Medicine

Abstract

Objective Few studies have evaluated the end-of-life preferences of elderly patients in rural communities and whether preferences are associated with level of health literacy. Design Randomized controlled trial of a goals-of-care video decision aid of advanced dementia. Participants Elderly subjects (65 years or older) at a primary care clinic in rural Louisiana. Methods Half of subjects heard a verbal description of advanced dementia and the goals of care; the other half heard the same verbal description and then viewed the video decision aid. End points were the preferred goal of care in advanced dementia: life-prolonging care (cardiopulmonary resuscitation [CPR], etc.), limited care (hospitalization but not CPR), or comfort care (symptom relief). The principal category for analysis was the difference in proportions of subjects preferring comfort care for each characteristic including randomization group and health literacy level. Results Seventy-six subjects were randomized to the verbal (n = 43) or video (n = 33) arms of the study. Among subjects receiving the verbal description of advanced dementia and the goals of care, 31 (72%) preferred comfort; 5 (12%) chose limited; and 7 (16%) desired life-prolonging. In the video group, 30 (91%) preferred comfort; 3 (9%) chose limited; and none desired life-prolonging (χ(2) = 6.3, df = 2, p = 0.047). Factors associated with greater likelihood of opting for comfort included greater health literacy (unadjusted odds ratio [OR] 12.1;…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1089/jpm.2010.0299

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Volandes, A. E., Ferguson, L. A., Davis, A. D., Hull, N. C., Green, M. J., Chang, Y., Deep, K., & Paasche-Orlow, M. K.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston (US)
  • Pennsylvania State University (US)
  • University of Kentucky (US)
  • Department of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts.
Corresponding author
Volandes, Angelo E.
Venue
Journal of Palliative Medicine
Published
2011-02
Volume
14
Issue
2
Pages
169-177
ISSN
  • 1096-6218 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-7740
OpenAlex
W1977472032
Cited by
100
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 2
FWCI
4.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Palliative Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics and bioethics in healthcare
Keywords
end-of-life preferences, advanced dementia, goals of care, health literacy, rural elderly, comfort care, cardiopulmonary resuscitation
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Dementia, Female, Humans, Louisiana, Male, Rural Population, Terminal Care, Videotape Recording, Patient Preference

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