Feasibility and Pilot Studies in Palliative Care Research: A Systematic Review

Jones, TA; Olds, TS; Currow, DC; Williams, MT

Feasibility and Pilot Studies in Palliative Care Research: A Systematic Review

Jones, TA Olds, TS Currow, DC

Williams, MT

Permalink

Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, 2017, 54 (1), pp. 139 - 151.e4
Issue Date:: 2017-07-01

Closed Access

	Filename	Description	Size
	Feasibility and Pilot Studies in Palliative Care Research.pdf	Published Version	292.93 kB	Adobe PDF	View/Open

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Closed Access

This item is closed access and not available.

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Jones, TA	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Olds, TS	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Currow, DC https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1988-1250	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Williams, MT	en_US
dc.date.available	2017-02-20	en_US
dc.date.issued	2017-07-01	en_US
dc.identifier.citation	Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, 2017, 54 (1), pp. 139 - 151.e4	en_US
dc.identifier.issn	0885-3924	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/115181
dc.description.abstract	© 2017 American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine Context Feasibility and pilot study designs are common in palliative care research. Finding standard guidelines on the structure and reporting of these study types is difficult. Objectives In feasibility and pilot studies in palliative care research, to determine 1) how commonly a priori feasibility are criteria reported and whether results are subsequently reported against these criteria? and 2) how commonly are participants' views on acceptability of burden of the study protocol assessed? Methods Four databases (OVID Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, and PubMed via caresearch.com.au.) were searched. Search terms included palliative care, terminal care, advance care planning, hospice, pilot, feasibility, with a publication date between January 1, 2012 and December 31, 2013. Articles were selected and appraised by two independent reviewers. Results Fifty-six feasibility and/or pilot studies were included in this review. Only three studies had clear a priori criteria to measure success. Sixteen studies reported participant acceptability or burden with measures. Forty-eight studies concluded feasibility. Conclusion The terms “feasibility” and “pilot” are used synonymously in palliative care research when describing studies that test for feasibility. Few studies in palliative care research outline clear criteria for success. The assessment of participant acceptability and burden is uncommon. A gold standard for feasibility study design in palliative care research that includes both clear criteria for success and testing of the study protocol for participant acceptability and burden is needed. Such a standard would assist with consistency in the design, conduct and reporting of feasibility and pilot studies.	en_US
dc.relation.ispartof	Journal of Pain and Symptom Management	en_US
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2017.02.015	en_US
dc.subject.classification	Anesthesiology	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Humans	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Palliative Care	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Feasibility Studies	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Pilot Projects	en_US
dc.title	Feasibility and Pilot Studies in Palliative Care Research: A Systematic Review	en_US
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	1	en_US
utslib.citation.volume	54	en_US
utslib.for	11 Medical and Health Sciences	en_US
pubs.embargo.period	Not known	en_US
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Health
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Health/IMPACCT
utslib.copyright.status	closed_access
pubs.issue	1	en_US
pubs.publication-status	Published	en_US
pubs.volume	54	en_US

Abstract:

© 2017 American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine Context Feasibility and pilot study designs are common in palliative care research. Finding standard guidelines on the structure and reporting of these study types is difficult. Objectives In feasibility and pilot studies in palliative care research, to determine 1) how commonly a priori feasibility are criteria reported and whether results are subsequently reported against these criteria? and 2) how commonly are participants' views on acceptability of burden of the study protocol assessed? Methods Four databases (OVID Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, and PubMed via caresearch.com.au.) were searched. Search terms included palliative care, terminal care, advance care planning, hospice, pilot, feasibility, with a publication date between January 1, 2012 and December 31, 2013. Articles were selected and appraised by two independent reviewers. Results Fifty-six feasibility and/or pilot studies were included in this review. Only three studies had clear a priori criteria to measure success. Sixteen studies reported participant acceptability or burden with measures. Forty-eight studies concluded feasibility. Conclusion The terms “feasibility” and “pilot” are used synonymously in palliative care research when describing studies that test for feasibility. Few studies in palliative care research outline clear criteria for success. The assessment of participant acceptability and burden is uncommon. A gold standard for feasibility study design in palliative care research that includes both clear criteria for success and testing of the study protocol for participant acceptability and burden is needed. Such a standard would assist with consistency in the design, conduct and reporting of feasibility and pilot studies.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/115181