ArticleFrontiers in public health2025
Factors influencing healthcare professionals' rating on quality of death and dying: a nationwide cross-sectional study in China.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Understanding healthcare professionals' perspectives on the quality of death and dying is essential for improving palliative care in China, especially as hospice and palliative services expand. This study examined how Chinese healthcare professionals' assessments of death and dying quality vary by institutional setting, sociodemographic factors, professional background, and training experience. A cross-sectional design was conducted. Between November 2023 and January 2024, 2,465 healthcare professionals engaged in palliative and hospice care (including doctors, nurses, and social workers) participated in the survey. Multivariate linear regression models and propensity score matching were used to identify factors associated with Quality of Death and Dying Index ratings. Higher ratings on the Index were observed among respondents working in institutions with multidisciplinary end-of-life care teams, those who were female, born in the 1970s, held a bachelor's degree, had longer years of service, cared for patients with a survival period of three to six months, and participated in palliative care training programs. These findings suggest that institutional collaboration, professional experience, and targeted training are closely linked to more favorable perceptions of death and dying quality among healthcare workers. Enhancing multidisciplinary coordination and ensuring equitable access to training opportunities may help improve end-of-life care quality within healthcare institutions. The results provide evidence-based insights into the determinants of death and dying quality in China, offering practical guidance for strengthening palliative and hospice care development in rapidly aging societies where end-of-life service systems are still evolving.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.