Cardiff University | Prifysgol Caerdydd ORCA
Online Research @ Cardiff 
WelshClear Cookie - decide language by browser settings

An evaluation of systematic reviews of palliative care services

Goodwin, D. M., Higginson, I. J., Edwards, Adrian G., Finlay, I. G., Cook, A. M., Hood, K., Douglas, H. R. and Normand, C. E. 2002. An evaluation of systematic reviews of palliative care services. Journal of Palliative Care 18 (2) , pp. 77-83.

Full text not available from this repository.


This review aimed to identify and appraise all systematic reviews of palliative care services, to examine their findings in relation to methods used, and to explore whether further methods such as meta-analysis and meta-regression may be worthwhile. Ten databases were searched and augmented by hand searching specific journals, contacting authors, and examining the reference lists of all papers retrieved. Five systematic reviews met the inclusion criteria, and the update electronic search identified a further systematic review which found similar studies. A total of 39 studies were identified by the five systematic reviews. Of the 39 studies, 15 were RCTS, and 12 of those were North American. In comparison, the majority of U.K. studies were retrospective. Each review concluded similarly that there was a lack of good quality evidence on which to base conclusions. The more recent reviews were more rigorous, but none used a quantitative analysis. Despite the difficulties in combining heterogeneous interventions and outcomes in meta-analysis or meta-regression, such techniques may be valuable. More high quality evidence is needed to compare the relative merits of the differences in models of palliative care services, so that countries can learn from other appropriate systems of care at end of life

Item Type: Article
Date Type: Publication
Status: Published
Schools: Medicine
Subjects: R Medicine > R Medicine (General)
Publisher: Centre for Bioethics
ISSN: 0825-8597
Related URLs:
Last Modified: 04 Jun 2017 07:58

Citation Data

Cited 40 times in Google Scholar. View in Google Scholar

Cited 27 times in Scopus. View in Scopus. Powered By Scopus® Data

Actions (repository staff only)

Edit Item Edit Item