Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 287

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 59 of the 59 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Evidence-Based Palliative Care in the Intensive Care Unit: A Systematic Review of Interventions

Open access
Aslakson, Rebecca, Cheng, Jennifer, Vollenweider, Daniela, Galusca, Dragos, Smith, Thomas J., Pronovost, Peter J.·2014·Journal of Palliative Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Over the last 20 years, multiple interventions to better integrate palliative care and intensive care unit (ICU) care have been evaluated. This systematic review summarizes these studies and their outcomes. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), the Cochrane Library, and the Web of Science; performed a search of articles published by opinion leaders in the field; and reviewed hand-search articles as of August 13, 2012. The terms "palliative care" and "intensive care unit" were mapped to MeSH subject headings and "exploded." We included trials of adult patients that evaluated an ICU intervention and addressed Robert Wood Johnson group-identified domains of high-quality end-of-life care in the ICU. We excluded case series, editorials, and review articles. We compared two types of interventions, integrative and consultative, focusing on the outcomes of patient and family satisfaction, mortality, and ICU and hospital length of stay (LOS), because these were most prevalent among studies. RESULTS: Our search strategy yielded 3328 references, of which we included 37 publications detailing 30 unique interventions. Interventions and outcome measures were heterogeneous, and many studies were underpowered and/or subject to multiple biases. Most of the interventions resulted in a decrease in hospital and ICU LOS. Few interventions significantly affected satisfaction. With one exception, the interventions decreased or had no effect on mortality. There was no evidence of harm from any intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Heterogeneity of interventions made comparison of ICU-based palliative care interventions difficult. However, existing evidence suggests proactive palliative care in the ICU, using either consultative or integrative palliative care interventions, decrease hospital and ICU LOS, do not affect satisfaction, and either decrease or do not affect mortality.

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 · 10.1089/jpm.2013.0409

Cites

59 of 59 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 59 references

Cited by

See all 287

Metadata

Authors
Aslakson, R., Cheng, J., Vollenweider, D., Galusca, D., Smith, T. J., & Pronovost, P. J.
Venue
Journal of Palliative Medicine
Published
2014-02
Volume
17
Issue
2
Pages
219-235
ISSN
  • 1096-6218 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-7740
OpenAlex
W2053991456
Cited by
287
References
59
FWCI
4.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Evidence-Based Palliative Care in the Intensive Care Unit: A Systematic Review of Interventions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1089/jpm.2013.0409
The paper
Aslakson, R., Cheng, J., Vollenweider, D., Galusca, D., Smith, T. J., & Pronovost, P. J. (2014). Evidence-Based Palliative Care in the Intensive Care Unit: A Systematic Review of Interventions. Journal of Palliative Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1089/jpm.2013.0409

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.