Cited by 132Palliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesPalliative and Oncologic CarePain Management and Opioid Use

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 54 of the 54 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Associations Among End-of-Life Discussions, Health-Care Utilization, and Costs in Persons With Advanced Cancer: A Systematic Review

Open access
Starr, Lauren T., Ulrich, Connie M., Corey, Kristin L., Meghani, Salimah H.·2019·American Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine®

Abstract

Background: Aggressive end-of-life (EOL) care is associated with lower quality of life and greater regret about treatment decisions. Higher EOL costs are also associated with lower quality EOL care. Advance care planning and goals-of-care conversations (“EOL discussions”) may influence EOL health-care utilization and costs among persons with cancer. Objective: To describe associations among EOL discussions, health-care utilization and place of death, and costs in persons with advanced cancer and explore variation in study measures. Methods: A systematic review was conducted using PubMed, Embase, and CINAHL. Twenty quantitative studies published between January 2012 and January 2019 were included. Results: End-of-life discussions are associated with lower health-care costs in the last 30 days of life (median US$1048 vs US$23482; P < .001); lower likelihood of acute care at EOL (odds ratio [(OR] ranging 0.43-0.69); lower likelihood of intensive care at EOL (ORs ranging 0.26-0.68); lower odds of chemotherapy near death (ORs 0.41, 0.57); lower odds of emergency department use and shorter length of hospital stay; greater use of hospice (ORs ranging 1.79 to 6.88); and greater likelihood of death outside the hospital. Earlier EOL discussions (30+ days before death) are more strongly associated with less aggressive care outcomes than conversations occurring near death. Conclusions: End-of-life discussions are associated with less aggressive, less costly EOL care. Clinicians should initiate these discussions with patients having cancer earlier to better align care with preferences.

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 · 10.1177/1049909119848148

Cites

54 of 54 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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

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

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Arozullah AM, 2004, J Support Oncol, 2, 271
  2. O’Connor NR, 2017, Am J Hosp Palliat Care, 35, 966
  3. Haynes MA, 1999, The Unequal Burden of Cancer: An Assessment of NIH Research and Programs for Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved
  4. Zafar SY, 2013, Oncology (Williston Park), 27, 80
  5. Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. Levels of evidence-1. 2009. https://www.cebm.net/2009/06/oxford-centre-evidence-based-medicine-levels-evidence-march-2009/. Accessed November 8, 2018.
  6. Zafar SY, 2015, Am J Manag Care, 21, 607

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 132

Metadata

Authors
Starr, L. T., Ulrich, C. M., Corey, K. L., & Meghani, S. H.
Affiliations
  • Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics (US)
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
Corresponding author
Starr, Lauren T.
Venue
American Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine®
Published
2019-05-09
Volume
36
Issue
10
Pages
913-926
ISSN
  • 1049-9091 (ISSN-L)
  • 1938-2715
OpenAlex
W2944707386
Cited by
132
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 26 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 14
FWCI
2.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine® (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics at the University of Pennsylvania (Jonas Nurse Leaders Scholars program)
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 › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Opioid Use
Keywords
end-of-life discussions, advance care planning, goals of care discussions, advanced cancer, health care utilization, end-of-life care costs, place of death, hospice use, chemotherapy near death, quality of end-of-life care
MeSH terms
Communication, Health Expenditures, Health Resources, Health Services, Humans, Neoplasms, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Patient Care Planning, Quality of Life, Severity of Illness Index, Terminal Care, Advance Care Planning

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