Geographic variations in place of death and palliative care utilisation in the last three months of life in high-income countries: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Geographic variations in end-of-life healthcare utilisation may highlight disparities in access to care, including palliative care. Studies demonstrate that place of death and palliative care utilisation are influenced by geographic exposures such as sociodemographic and socioeconomic characteristics, rurality, and health service availability. No systematic review has synthesised the evidence across multiple geographic exposures. This is important to provide conclusions from a broader evidence base and inform equitable commissioning of palliative care services. AIM: To investigate the influence of geographic exposures on individual-level place of death and palliative care utilisation in the last three months of life, to identify potential disparities in end-of-life healthcare provision. METHODS: In this systematic literature review of quantitative data with narrative synthesis, nine databases were searched for peer-reviewed observational studies published between 1st January 2004 and 1st October 2024. Eligible studies recruited adults in high-income countries and compared two or more geographic exposures. Methodological quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. RESULTS: Of 9,296 studies identified, 51 retrospective studies across 24 countries were included. Rurality was positively associated with home death and decreased palliative care utilisation. Regarding healthcare availability, greater bed availability in hospital or long-term care facilities increased likelihood of death in that facility. Similarly, closer proximity to a hospice or hospital location increased likelihood of death in that facility. Hospital death may be positively associated with residence in certain countries, regions of high population density, and those containing capital cities. CONCLUSIONS: Findings highlight geographic variations as areas of focus for commissioners and policymakers to reduce local end-of-life healthcare inequities. We make recommendations regarding structural care gaps, service efficiency, and innovation in palliative care provision. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: Prospero registration number CRD42019154912.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".