ArticleAsia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing2026
Association between death literacy and life-sustaining treatment preferences in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer.
Article in Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Evidence suggests that individuals with higher death literacy levels are more capable of planning their own end-of-life care. Lung cancer has the highest mortality among all cancers; therefore, early clarification of preferences for life-sustaining treatments (LSTs) represents an important and urgent clinical concern. This study aimed to examine the association between death literacy and preferences for LSTs among patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods: This cross-sectional study included 103 patients with stage IIIB or higher NSCLC at a medical center in northern Taiwan. Data were collected using structured questionnaires that assessed patients' sociodemographic characteristics, death literacy, and life-sustaining treatment preferences. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize participant characteristics. Pearson's correlation was used to analyze associations between LST preferences and death literacy. One-way ANOVA was used to analyze differences in preferences for LSTs by tertiles of total death literacy scaled mean scores: low (≤ 5.21), moderate (> 5.21 to ≤ 6.59), and high (> 6.59). Results: Among the LST options, cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) was rated as the least desirable, whereas antibiotic therapy was the most favored. Higher overall death literacy scores, as well as the subscales of practical, experiential, and factual knowledge in death literacy, were significantly and inversely associated with preferences for LSTs, such as antibiotics, blood transfusion, hemodialysis, nasogastric tube insertion, intubation, and CPR; this indicated a modest correlation with lower willingness to receive these treatments. In addition, compared with the low death literacy group, patients in the high death literacy group were less likely to prefer aggressive LSTs. Conclusions: Patients with higher death literacy levels were less likely to prefer aggressive LSTs. This study provides an initial empirical foundation for clarifying the nature and direction of these associations. Future research with larger and more diverse samples, as well as with longitudinal designs, is warranted to examine how death literacy and treatment preferences evolve over time across different disease populations.
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.