Systematic review of conceptual and theoretical frameworks used in palliative care and end-of-life care research studies

Author:

Tark Aluem1ORCID,Estrada Leah V1,Stone Patricia W1,Baernholdt Marianne2,Buck Harleah G3

Affiliation:

1. Columbia University School of Nursing, New York, NY, USA

2. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA

3. University of Iowa College of Nursing, Iowa, IA, USA

Abstract

Background: Frameworks are the conceptual underpinnings of the study. Both conceptual and theoretical frameworks are often used in palliative and end-of-life care studies to help with study design, guide, and conduct investigations. While an increasing number of investigators have included frameworks in their study, to date, there has not been a comprehensive review of frameworks that were utilized in palliative and end-of-life care research studies. Aim: To summarize conceptual and theoretical frameworks used in palliative and end-of-life care research studies. And to synthesize which of eight domains from the National Consensus Project’s Clinical Practice Guidelines for Quality Palliative Care (fourth edition) each framework belongs to. Design: Systematic review. Data sources: Four electronic databases (EMBASE, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health, PsychINFO, and PubMed) were searched from July 2010 to September 2021. Results: A total 2231 citations were retrieved, of which 44 articles met eligibility. Across primary studies, 33,801 study participants were captured. Twenty-six investigators (59.1%) proposed previously unpublished frameworks. In 10 studies, investigators modified existing frameworks, mainly to overcome inherent limitations. In eight studies, investigators utilized existing frameworks referenced in previously published studies. There were eight orientations identified among 44 frameworks we reviewed (e.g. system, patient, patient-doctor). Conclusions: We examined palliative and end-of-life research studies to identify and characterize conceptual or theoretical frameworks proposed or utilized. Of 44 frameworks we reviewed, 21 studies (47.7%) were aligned with a Clinical Practice Guideline’s single domain, while the rest two or more of eight guidelines in quality palliative care domains.

Funder

Jonas Center for Nursing and Veterans Healthcare

National Institute of Nursing Research

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine,General Medicine

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3