Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 401

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 52 of the 52 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Non-beneficial treatments in hospital at the end of life: a systematic review on extent of the problem

Open access
Cardona-Morrell, M, Kim, JCH, Turner, RM, Anstey, M, Mitchell, IA, Hillman, K·2016·International Journal for Quality in Health Care

Abstract

PURPOSE: To investigate the extent of objective 'non-beneficial treatments (NBTs)' (too much) anytime in the last 6 months of life in routine hospital care. DATA SOURCES: English language publications in Medline, EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane library, and the grey literature (January 1995-April 2015). STUDY SELECTION: All study types assessing objective dimensions of non-beneficial medical or surgical diagnostic, therapeutic or non-palliative procedures administered to older adults at the end of life (EOL). DATA EXTRACTION: A 13-item quality score estimated independently by two authors. RESULTS OF DATA SYNTHESIS: Evidence from 38 studies indicates that on average 33-38% of patients near the EOL received NBTs. Mean prevalence of resuscitation attempts for advanced stage patients was 28% (range 11-90%). Mean death in intensive care unit (ICU) was 42% (range 11-90%); and mean death rate in a hospital ward was 44.5% (range 29-60%). Mean prevalence of active measures including dialysis, radiotherapy, transfusions and life support treatment to terminal patient was 7-77% (mean 30%). Non-beneficial administration of antibiotics, cardiovascular, digestive and endocrine treatments to dying patients occurred in 11-75% (mean 38%). Non-beneficial tests were performed on 33-50% of patients with do-not-resuscitate orders. From meta-analyses, the pooled prevalence of non-beneficial ICU admission was 10% (95% CI 0-33%); for chemotherapy in the last six weeks of life was 33% (95% CI 24-41%). CONCLUSION: This review has confirmed widespread use of NBTs at the EOL in acute hospitals. While a certain level of NBT is inevitable, its extent, variation and justification need further scrutiny.

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 · 10.1093/intqhc/mzw060

Cites

52 of 52 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 52 references

Cited by

See all 401

Metadata

Authors
Cardona-Morrell, M., Kim, J., Turner, R., Anstey, M., Mitchell, I., & Hillman, K.
Venue
International Journal for Quality in Health Care
Published
2016-09-01
Volume
28
Issue
4
Pages
456-469
ISSN
  • 1353-4505 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-3677
OpenAlex
W2471761637
Cited by
401
References
52
FWCI
5.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Non-beneficial treatments in hospital at the end of life: a systematic review on extent of the problem. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/intqhc/mzw060
The paper
Cardona-Morrell, M., Kim, J., Turner, R., Anstey, M., Mitchell, I., & Hillman, K. (2016). Non-beneficial treatments in hospital at the end of life: a systematic review on extent of the problem. International Journal for Quality in Health Care. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzw060

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.