• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

癌症患者的善终观念:一项定性系统评价研究方案。

Notion of a good death for patients with cancer: a qualitative systematic review protocol.

机构信息

Xiangya School of Nursing, Central South University, Changsha, China.

Xiangya School of Nursing, Central South University, Changsha, China

出版信息

BMJ Open. 2022 May 10;12(5):e056104. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-056104.

DOI:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-056104
PMID:35537791
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9092165/
Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Promoting the quality of death and achieving a good death is one of the most important goals of palliative care in cancer care. Few studies synthesised views of patients with cancer on the notion of a good death and its associated factors. By eliciting the core elements of a good death, the review aims to identify potential unmet needs of patients with cancer and reveal their common values and care preferences at the end of life. The review also has the potential to inform the development of guidelines for clinical care and shared decision-making in palliative care practice.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A qualitative systematic review will be conducted and reported according to the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology for systematic review and synthesis of qualitative data and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Comprehensive search will be performed in six English and two Chinese databases from inception to 30 April 2022 to retrieve relevant qualitative articles focusing on the notion of a good death from the perspective of patients with cancer. Data will be extracted using the JBI standardised data extraction tool for qualitative research. The quality of the included studies will be critically appraised using the JBI Qualitative Assessment and Review Instrument. Data extraction and quality appraisal will be conducted by two reviewers independently. A meta-aggregative approach and narrative summary will be used to synthesise data.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval is not needed. We will disseminate the findings through international conferences related to cancer care or palliative care. The final review will be submitted and published in a peer-reviewed journal.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42021266629.

摘要

简介

在癌症关怀中,提高死亡质量并实现善终是姑息治疗的最重要目标之一。很少有研究综合了癌症患者对善终概念及其相关因素的看法。通过引出善终的核心要素,本综述旨在确定癌症患者未满足的需求,并揭示他们在生命末期的共同价值观和护理偏好。该综述还有可能为姑息治疗实践中的临床护理和共同决策指南的制定提供信息。

方法和分析

将按照乔安娜·布里格斯研究所(JBI)的系统评价和定性数据综合以及系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目的方法进行定性系统评价,并进行报告。将从 2022 年 4 月 30 日起,在六个英文数据库和两个中文数据库中进行全面搜索,以检索从癌症患者角度关注善终概念的相关定性文章。将使用 JBI 标准化定性研究数据提取工具提取数据。将使用 JBI 定性评估和审查工具对纳入研究的质量进行批判性评估。数据提取和质量评估将由两名评审员独立进行。将使用元综合方法和叙述性总结来综合数据。

伦理和传播

不需要伦理批准。我们将通过与癌症护理或姑息治疗相关的国际会议来传播研究结果。最终的综述将提交并发表在同行评议的期刊上。

PROSPERO 注册号:CRD42021266629。

相似文献

1
Notion of a good death for patients with cancer: a qualitative systematic review protocol.癌症患者的善终观念:一项定性系统评价研究方案。
BMJ Open. 2022 May 10;12(5):e056104. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-056104.
2
Barriers and facilitators to dementia care in long-term care facilities: protocol for a qualitative systematic review and meta-synthesis.长期护理机构中痴呆症护理的障碍和促进因素:定性系统评价和荟萃综合的方案。
BMJ Open. 2023 Nov 1;13(11):e076058. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-076058.
3
Preferences about place of end-of-life care and death of patients with life-threatening illnesses and their families: a protocol for an umbrella review.危及生命的疾病患者及其家属对临终关怀地点和死亡的偏好:伞式综述方案。
BMJ Open. 2023 Mar 29;13(3):e066374. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-066374.
4
Positive experiences of family caregivers of patients with chronic heart failure: protocol for a qualitative systematic review and meta-synthesis.慢性心力衰竭患者的家庭照顾者积极体验的定性系统评价和元分析方案。
BMJ Open. 2022 Dec 8;12(12):e063880. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-063880.
5
Lived experiences of parents providing care to young people who self-harm: a protocol for a meta-aggregative synthesis of qualitative studie.父母照顾自残青少年的生活体验:定性研究元聚合综合的方案
BMJ Open. 2022 Aug 29;12(8):e065489. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-065489.
6
Experiences of pregnant women with gestational diabetes mellitus: a systematic review of qualitative evidence protocol.孕妇妊娠糖尿病体验的系统评价:定性证据方案。
BMJ Open. 2020 Feb 18;10(2):e034126. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-034126.
7
The experience and expectations of terminally ill patients receiving music therapy in the palliative setting: a systematic review.临终关怀环境中接受音乐疗法的晚期患者的经历与期望:一项系统综述
JBI Libr Syst Rev. 2010;8(27):1088-1111. doi: 10.11124/01938924-201008270-00001.
8
Experiences and perspectives of healthcare professionals, patients and caregivers toward the serious illness conversation guide: protocol for a qualitative meta-synthesis.医疗保健专业人员、患者和护理人员对严重疾病对话指南的经验和观点:定性荟萃分析方案。
BMJ Open. 2023 Nov 27;13(11):e073171. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-073171.
9
Experiences and management needs of endocrine therapy-related symptoms in patients with breast cancer: a systematic review and qualitative evidence synthesis protocol.乳腺癌患者内分泌治疗相关症状的体验和管理需求:系统评价和定性证据综合方案。
BMJ Open. 2023 Dec 7;13(12):e073915. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-073915.
10
Community engagement in research in sub-Saharan Africa: approaches, barriers, facilitators, ethical considerations and the role of gender - a systematic review protocol.社区参与撒哈拉以南非洲地区研究:方法、障碍、促进因素、伦理考虑因素以及性别的作用——系统评价方案。
BMJ Open. 2022 May 11;12(5):e057922. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-057922.

引用本文的文献

1
Barriers and facilitators to explore palliative care implementation in the ICU from tripartite perspectives: a qualitative systematic review and meta-aggregation.从三方视角探讨重症监护病房实施姑息治疗的障碍与促进因素:一项定性系统评价与元聚合分析
BMJ Open. 2025 Aug 26;15(8):e103616. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2025-103616.
2
Palliative care and its association with the quality of death in patients with advanced cancer in China: a cross-sectional study with a family caregivers' perspective.中国晚期癌症患者的姑息治疗及其与死亡质量的关联:一项从家庭照顾者视角开展的横断面研究
BMJ Open. 2025 Jul 10;15(7):e081215. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-081215.
3
"Don't need resuscitate" in palliative care: Ethical challenge or obstacle to a good death.姑息治疗中的“不要复苏”:伦理挑战还是安详死亡的障碍?
Asia Pac J Oncol Nurs. 2025 Mar 8;12:100681. doi: 10.1016/j.apjon.2025.100681. eCollection 2025 Dec.
4
Systemic therapy and radiotherapy related complications and subsequent hospitalisation rates: a systematic review.系统治疗和放疗相关并发症及后续住院率:系统评价。
BMC Cancer. 2024 Jul 10;24(1):826. doi: 10.1186/s12885-024-12560-8.
5
Qualitative study on the perception of good death in patients with end-stage cancer in oncology nurses.肿瘤护理人员对晚期癌症患者善终观念的质性研究
BMC Nurs. 2024 Jun 25;23(1):431. doi: 10.1186/s12912-024-02081-x.

本文引用的文献

1
Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries.《全球癌症统计数据 2020:全球 185 个国家和地区 36 种癌症的发病率和死亡率估计》。
CA Cancer J Clin. 2021 May;71(3):209-249. doi: 10.3322/caac.21660. Epub 2021 Feb 4.
2
Quality of death: The unspoken experiences of patients with advanced cancers in India - An exploratory qualitative study.死亡质量:印度晚期癌症患者的未言明体验——一项探索性定性研究。
Psychooncology. 2021 Jan;30(1):111-117. doi: 10.1002/pon.5570. Epub 2020 Oct 24.
3
Patient's Perspectives on the Notion of a Good Death: A Systematic Review of the Literature.患者对“善终”观念的看法:文献系统综述。
J Pain Symptom Manage. 2020 Jan;59(1):152-164. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2019.07.033. Epub 2019 Aug 9.
4
The development of software to support multiple systematic review types: the Joanna Briggs Institute System for the Unified Management, Assessment and Review of Information (JBI SUMARI).开发支持多种系统评价类型的软件:Joanna Briggs 研究所信息统一管理、评估和审查系统(JBI SUMARI)。
Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2019 Mar;17(1):36-43. doi: 10.1097/XEB.0000000000000152.
5
A good death from the perspective of palliative cancer patients.从姑息治疗癌症患者的角度看善终。
Support Care Cancer. 2017 Mar;25(3):933-939. doi: 10.1007/s00520-016-3483-9. Epub 2016 Nov 12.
6
Defining a Good Death (Successful Dying): Literature Review and a Call for Research and Public Dialogue.界定善终(成功离世):文献综述及对研究与公众对话的呼吁
Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2016 Apr;24(4):261-71. doi: 10.1016/j.jagp.2016.01.135. Epub 2016 Jan 22.
7
A Guide to Writing a Qualitative Systematic Review Protocol to Enhance Evidence-Based Practice in Nursing and Health Care.撰写定性系统评价方案指南,以加强护理和医疗保健中的循证实践
Worldviews Evid Based Nurs. 2016 Jun;13(3):241-9. doi: 10.1111/wvn.12134. Epub 2016 Jan 20.
8
Qualitative research synthesis: methodological guidance for systematic reviewers utilizing meta-aggregation.定性研究综合:利用元聚合的系统评价者的方法学指南。
Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2015 Sep;13(3):179-87. doi: 10.1097/XEB.0000000000000062.
9
Establishing confidence in the output of qualitative research synthesis: the ConQual approach.建立对定性研究综合结果的信心:ConQual方法。
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2014 Sep 20;14:108. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-14-108.
10
JBI's systematic reviews: data extraction and synthesis.循证卫生保健国际中心的系统评价:数据提取与综合
Am J Nurs. 2014 Jul;114(7):49-54. doi: 10.1097/01.NAJ.0000451683.66447.89.