Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 396

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Influence of Patient Preferences and Local Health System Characteristics on the Place of Death

Pritchard, Robert S., Fisher, Elliott S., Teno, Joan M., Sharp, Sandra M., Reding, Douglas J., Knaus, William A., Wennberg, John E., Lynn, Joanne, SUPPORT Investigators·1998·Journal of the American Geriatrics Society

Abstract

OBJECTIVE : To examine the degree to which variation in place of death is explained by differences in the characteristics of patients, including preferences for dying at home, and by differences in the characteristics of local health systems. DESIGN : We drew on a clinically rich database to carry out a prospective study using data from the observational phase of the Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatments (SUPPORT component). We used administrative databases for the Medicare program to carry out a national cross‐sectional analysis of Medicare enrollees place of death (Medicare component). SETTING : Five teaching hospitals (SUPPORT); All U.S. Hospital Referral Regions (Medicare). STUDY POPULATIONS : Patients dying after the enrollment hospitalization in the observational phase of SUPPORT for whom place of death and preferences were known. Medicare beneficiaries who died in 1992 or 1993. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES : Place of death (hospital vs non‐hospital). RESULTS : In SUPPORT, most patients expressed a preference for dying at home, yet most died in the hospital. The percent of SUPPORT patients dying in‐hospital varied by greater than 2‐fold across the five SUPPORT sites (29 to 66%). For Medicare beneficiaries, the percent dying in‐hospital varied from 23 to 54% across U.S. Hospital Referral Regions (HRRs). In SUPPORT, variations in place of death across site were not explained by sociodemographic or clinical characteristics or patient preferences. Patient level (SUPPORT) and national cross‐sectional (Medicare) multivariate models gave consistent results. The risk of in‐hospital death was increased for residents of regions with greater hospital bed availability and use; the risk of in‐hospital death was decreased in regions with greater nursing home and hospice availability and use. Measures of hospital bed availability and use were the most powerful predictors of place of death across HRRs. CONCLUSIONS : Whether people die in the hospital or not is powerfully influenced by characteristics of the local health system but not by patient preferences or other patient characteristics. These findings may explain the failure of the SUPPORT intervention to alter care patterns for seriously ill and dying patients. Reforming the care of dying patients may require modification of local resource availability and provider routines.

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 · 10.1111/j.1532-5415.1998.tb04540.x

Cites

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

Cited by

See all 396

Metadata

Authors
Pritchard, R. S., Fisher, E. S., Teno, J. M., Sharp, S. M., Reding, D. J., Knaus, W. A., Wennberg, J. E., Lynn, J., & SUPPORT Investigators
Venue
Journal of the American Geriatrics Society
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1998-10
Volume
46
Issue
10
Pages
1242-1250
ISSN
  • 0002-8614 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-5415
OpenAlex
W2032526518
Cited by
396
References
0
FWCI
19.12
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: Influence of Patient Preferences and Local Health System Characteristics on the Place of Death. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1532-5415.1998.tb04540.x
The paper
Pritchard, R. S., Fisher, E. S., Teno, J. M., Sharp, S. M., Reding, D. J., Knaus, W. A., Wennberg, J. E., Lynn, J., & SUPPORT Investigators. (1998). Influence of Patient Preferences and Local Health System Characteristics on the Place of Death. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.1998.tb04540.x

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.