Cited by 22Palliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesPalliative and Oncologic CareEthics and bioethics in healthcare

Making Visible a Theory-Guided Advance Care Planning Intervention.

Open access
Song, Mi‐Kyung, Ward, Sandra E.·2015·Journal of Nursing Scholarship

Abstract

Purpose: In reports of end‐of‐life communication interventions, it is difficult to find sufficient detail about the intervention to allow replication, extension, and translation into practice. The purpose of this article is to provide details about a theory‐guided advance care planning intervention, sharing the patient's illness representations to increase trust (SPIRIT), an intervention that has been shown to be efficacious for patients and their surrogates with respect to preparation for end‐of‐life decision making. Methods and Design: The description of SPIRIT is based on an intervention description checklist by Conn (2012), the Intervention Taxonomy from Schulz, Czaja, McKay, Ory, and Belle (2010) and on relevant segments of Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials. Discussion: The SPIRIT intervention was developed based on sound theoretical underpinnings and pilot tested with target patient populations and racial or ethnic groups. We describe details about the intervention's theoretical basis, requisite intervener training, implementation of each intervention component, and fidelity monitoring. Clinical Relevance: The details about the components of a theory‐guided advance care planning intervention may facilitate translation of the intervention to practice settings.

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/jnu.12156

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Song, M., & Ward, S. E.
Affiliations
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
  • University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
Corresponding author
Song, Mi‐Kyung
Venue
Journal of Nursing Scholarship
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-07-28
Volume
47
Issue
5
Pages
389-396
ISSN
  • 0363-2792 (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-6546
  • 1547-5069
OpenAlex
W1536074390
Cited by
22
References
28
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 4
FWCI
3.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Nursing Scholarship (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Korea National Institute of Health (5R01NR011464)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative and Oncologic Care
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics and bioethics in healthcare
Keywords
advance care planning, end-of-life communication, illness representations, trust, end-of-life decisions, surrogate decision-making, intervention implementation, racial and ethnic groups
MeSH terms
Communication, Decision Making, Humans, Professional-Patient Relations, Terminal Care, Advance Care Planning, Trust

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