Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 187

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Family Satisfaction with End‐of‐Life Care in Seriously Ill Hospitalized Adults

Baker, Rose, Hyg, MS, Wu, Albert W., Teno, Joan M., Kreling, Barbara, Damiano, Ann M., Rubin, Haya R., Roach, Mary J., Wenger, Neil S., Phillips, Russell S., Desbiens, Norman A., Connors, Albert F., Knaus, William, Lynn, Joanne·2000·Journal of the American Geriatrics Society

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To examine factors associated with family satisfaction with end‐of‐life care in the Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatments (SUPPORT). DESIGN: A prospective cohort study with patients randomized to either usual care or an intervention that included clinical nurse specialists to assist in symptom control and facilitation of communication and decision‐making. SETTING: Five teaching hospitals in the United States PARTICIPANTS: Family members and other surrogate respondents for 767 seriously ill hospitalized adults who died. MEASUREMENTS: Eight questionnaire items regarding satisfaction with the patient's medical care expressed as two scores, one measuring satisfaction with patient comfort and the other measuring satisfaction with communication and decision‐making. RESULTS: Sixteen percent of respondents reported dissatisfaction with patient comfort and 30% reported dissatisfaction with communication and decision‐making. Factors found to be significantly associated with satisfaction with communication and decision‐making were hospital site, whether death occurred during the index hospitalization (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 2.2, 95% CI, 1.3–3.9), and for patients who died following discharge, whether the patient received the SUPPORT intervention (AOR 2.0,1.2–3.2). For satisfaction with comfort, male surrogates reported less satisfaction (0.6, 0.4–1.0), surrogates who reported patients' preferences were followed moderately to not at all had less satisfaction (0.2, 0.1–0.4), and surrogates who reported the patient's illness had greater effect on family finances had less satisfaction (0.4, 0.2–0.8). CONCLUSIONS: Satisfaction scores suggest the need for improvement in end‐of‐life care, especially in communication and decision making. Further research is needed to understand how factors affect satisfaction with end‐of‐life care. An intervention like that used in SUPPORT may help family members.

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.1532-5415.2000.tb03143.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 187

Metadata

Authors
Baker, R., Hyg, M., Wu, A. W., Teno, J. M., Kreling, B., Damiano, A. M., Rubin, H. R., Roach, M. J., Wenger, N. S., Phillips, R. S., Desbiens, N. A., Connors, A. F., Knaus, W., & Lynn, J.
Venue
Journal of the American Geriatrics Society
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2000-05
Volume
48
Issue
S1
Pages
S61-9
ISSN
  • 0002-8614 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-5415
OpenAlex
W2012279219
Cited by
187
References
0
FWCI
12.01
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: Family Satisfaction with End‐of‐Life Care in Seriously Ill Hospitalized Adults. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2000.tb03143.x
The paper
Baker, R., Hyg, M., Wu, A. W., Teno, J. M., Kreling, B., Damiano, A. M., Rubin, H. R., Roach, M. J., Wenger, N. S., Phillips, R. S., Desbiens, N. A., Connors, A. F., Knaus, W., & Lynn, J. (2000). Family Satisfaction with End‐of‐Life Care in Seriously Ill Hospitalized Adults. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2000.tb03143.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.