ReviewJournal of multidisciplinary healthcare2026
Telepalliative Care on Quality of Life, Symptom Management, and Patient Satisfaction: A Systematic Review.
Review in Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare, 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
Telepalliative care has emerged as an innovative approach to expanding access to palliative services through digital health technologies. Despite increasing adoption, evidence regarding its impact on patient and caregiver outcomes remains heterogeneous. This systematic review aimed to synthesize recent evidence on the impact of telepalliative care on quality of life, symptom management, and satisfaction among patients and caregivers receiving palliative care. A systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Literature searches were performed in PubMed, EBSCO, and ScienceDirect to identify studies published between 2021 and 2025. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials, pilot studies, and qualitative studies evaluating telepalliative care interventions. Data were synthesized narratively, and methodological quality was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Tools. Twelve studies were included in the review. Telepalliative interventions comprised telephone-based care, mobile applications, messaging platforms, telehealth consultations, remote monitoring systems, and web-based programs. The evidence suggests that telepalliative care may support quality of life, symptom management, and satisfaction in some settings by enhancing communication, symptom monitoring, education, and care coordination. However, findings were heterogeneous across studies, and benefits were not consistently observed across all populations and outcome domains. Improvements in quality of life and symptom management were reported in several studies, whereas psychological outcomes and caregiver-related outcomes, including caregiver burden and self-efficacy, showed less consistent results. Digital literacy, technology access, caregiver support, and disease characteristics were identified as important factors influencing implementation and outcomes. Telepalliative care demonstrates promising potential to enhance palliative care delivery and improve access to services, particularly in resource-limited settings. Nevertheless, intervention benefits vary according to population characteristics, intervention modalities, and implementation contexts. Further high-quality research is needed to identify the most effective telepalliative strategies and optimize implementation across diverse care settings.
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.