{"doi":"10.3390/ijerph19074162","title":"Patient Identification for Serious Illness Conversations: A Scoping Review","abstract":"<jats:p>Serious illness conversations aim to align medical care and treatment with patients’ values, goals, priorities, and preferences. Timely and accurate identification of patients for serious illness conversations is essential; however, existent methods for patient identification in different settings and population groups have not been compared and contrasted. This study aimed to examine the current literature regarding patient identification for serious illness conversations within the context of the Serious Illness Care Program and/or the Serious Illness Conversation Guide. A scoping review was conducted using the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines. A comprehensive search was undertaken in four databases for literature published between January 2014 and September 2021. In total, 39 articles met the criteria for inclusion. This review found that patients were primarily identified for serious illness conversations using clinical/diagnostic triggers, the ’surprise question’, or a combination of methods. A diverse assortment of clinicians and non-clinical resources were described in the identification process, including physicians, nurses, allied health staff, administrative staff, and automated algorithms. Facilitators and barriers to patient identification are elucidated. Future research should test the efficacy of adapted identification methods and explore how clinicians inform judgements surrounding patient identification.</jats:p>","journal":"International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health","year":2022,"id":620281,"datarank":0.49983067652628066,"base_score":3.332204510175204,"endowment":3.332204510175204,"self_citation_contribution":0.49983067652628066,"citation_network_contribution":0.0,"self_endowment_contribution":0.49983067652628066,"citer_contribution":0.0,"corpus_percentile":null,"corpus_rank":null,"citation_count":27,"citer_count":0,"citers_with_citation_signal":0,"citers_with_endowment":0,"datacite_reuse_total":1,"is_dataset":false,"is_dataset_confidence":null,"is_data_producer":false,"deposit_databanks":null,"is_oa":false,"file_count":0,"downloads":0,"has_version_chain":false,"published_date":null,"fair_score":null,"fair_percentile":null,"algorithm_id":"datarank_citation_only_1hop_v6","ranking_scope":"data_only","authors":[{"id":739656,"name":"Erik K. Fromme","orcid":"0000-0002-6731-2338","position":1,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":1601219,"name":"Anna Sandgren","orcid":"0000-0002-3155-575X","position":2,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":1601218,"name":"Rebecca Baxter","orcid":"0000-0001-6595-6298","position":0,"is_corresponding":false}],"reference_count":0,"raw_metadata":{"has_enrichment":true,"resolved":true,"title":"Patient Identification for Serious Illness Conversations: A Scoping Review","abstract":"<jats:p>Serious illness conversations aim to align medical care and treatment with patients’ values, goals, priorities, and preferences. Timely and accurate identification of patients for serious illness conversations is essential; however, existent methods for patient identification in different settings and population groups have not been compared and contrasted. This study aimed to examine the current literature regarding patient identification for serious illness conversations within the context of the Serious Illness Care Program and/or the Serious Illness Conversation Guide. A scoping review was conducted using the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines. A comprehensive search was undertaken in four databases for literature published between January 2014 and September 2021. In total, 39 articles met the criteria for inclusion. This review found that patients were primarily identified for serious illness conversations using clinical/diagnostic triggers, the ’surprise question’, or a combination of methods. A diverse assortment of clinicians and non-clinical resources were described in the identification process, including physicians, nurses, allied health staff, administrative staff, and automated algorithms. Facilitators and barriers to patient identification are elucidated. Future research should test the efficacy of adapted identification methods and explore how clinicians inform judgements surrounding patient identification.</jats:p>","is_dataset_classified":null,"base_score":3.332204510175204,"endowment":3.332204510175204,"datacite_reuse_total":1,"file_count":0,"downloads":0,"views":0,"has_version_chain":false,"is_dataset":false,"is_oa":false,"pmid":"35409844","pmcid":"PMC8998898","openalex_id":"https://openalex.org/W4220935551","authors":[],"funders":[{"funder_name":"Kamprad Family Foundation","grant_id":"20172014","title":null},{"funder_name":"Kamprad Family Foundation","grant_id":"unidentified","title":"unidentified"}],"total_grants":2,"fwci":4.8424,"citation_percentile":0.95652565,"influential_citations":0,"citation_trend":[{"year":2023,"count":3},{"year":2024,"count":11},{"year":2025,"count":11},{"year":2026,"count":2}],"oa_status":"gold","license":"cc-by","oa_locations":[{"url":"https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/7/4162/pdf?version=1648782666","host_type":"journal"},{"url":"https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/7/4162/pdf?version=1648782666","host_type":"publisher"},{"url":"https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/7/4162/pdf","host_type":"publisher"},{"url":"https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19074162","host_type":"journal"},{"url":"https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35409844","host_type":"repository"},{"url":"http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:lnu:diva-111635","host_type":"repository"},{"url":"http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-214328","host_type":"repository"},{"url":"https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/7/4162/","host_type":"repository"},{"url":"https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19074162","host_type":"repository"},{"url":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/8998898","host_type":"repository"},{"url":"https://europepmc.org/articles/PMC8998898","host_type":"Europe_PMC"},{"url":"https://europepmc.org/articles/PMC8998898?pdf=render","host_type":"Europe_PMC"},{"url":"http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19074162","host_type":""},{"url":"https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19074162","host_type":""}],"fields_of_study":["Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues","Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare","Patient Dignity and Privacy","03 medical and health sciences","0302 clinical medicine","Communication","Critical Illness","Humans"],"mesh_terms":["Communication","Humans","Critical Illness"],"keywords":["Identification (biology)","Context (archaeology)","Surprise","Conversation","Inclusion (mineral)","Medicine","Health care","MEDLINE","Population","Nursing","Psychology","Review","Palliative care","End Of Life","Advance Care Planning","Scoping Review","Patient Identification Systems","Serious Illness Communication","Serious Illness Conversations","Serious Illness Care Program","Omvårdnad","Communication","Critical Illness","610","Humans","Systematic Review"],"sdg_mappings":[{"sdg_number":3,"sdg_label":"3. Good health"}],"linked_datasets":[{"doi":"10.6084/m9.figshare.26734755.v1","title":"Additional file 1 of Adapting the serious illness conversation guide for unhoused older adults: a rapid qualitative study","publisher":"figshare","resource_type":"JournalArticle"}],"clinical_trials":[],"software_tools":[],"database_accessions":[],"source":"live","citation_network_status":"fetched"},"created_at":"2026-08-03T10:37:14.659163Z","pmid":null,"pmcid":null,"fwci":null,"citation_percentile":null,"influential_citations":0,"oa_status":null,"license":null,"views":0,"total_file_size_bytes":0,"version_count":0,"fair_f":null,"fair_a":null,"fair_i":null,"fair_r":null,"fair_zscore":null,"fair_rationale":null,"fair_model":null,"fair_agent_version":null,"fair_fulltext_source":null,"fair_has_llm":null,"fair_computed_at":null,"clinical_trials":[],"software_tools":[],"db_accessions":[],"linked_datasets":[],"topics":[]}