Talk:End-of-life care

message: I would suggest elaborating on the integrated care pathway section. (more information) as well as the spiritual care pathway section (more information)
Libby732 (talk) 14:21, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some sections could use more information 

message: Add more information about Right to Die in the introductory part. Add an additional section for the relevant policies on the subject that are either approved or in the process of getting approved. 
The subjects like symptoms and signs should be more towards the top of the page. 
Add more detail about the different options there are, such as hospice care, nursing home, assisted living, in-home living, and palliative care. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lucy H Ahn (talk • contribs) 05:52, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  CP133 2019 Group 19 Proposed Edits 

message: Angela: 
Hello group 19! It's great to see that most edits you have made have been retained. 
1. From the edits that have been made, I believe it's improved the article by bettering defining End-of-Life and providing information relevant to where EoLC is practiced within the U.S, as well as symptomatic management. I liked how each member worked on different sections of the article to help improve general information regarding EoLC. Based on the plans noted on the talk page here, group 19 has achieved its goals in improving this article. 
2. The edits submitted represent a neutral perspective because they contain mostly facts, such as the states practicing physician-assisted EoLC and opioids use, which included citations and statistics. Additionally, I noticed Jennifer made an edit that helped change a sentence to make it more of a neutral position (re: nurses). Group 19 is doing a great job so far in improving this article! Chang2021 (talk) 16:21, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  CP 133 2019 Group 18 Peer Edits 

message: This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 03:58, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject class rating

message: It seems to me that I've seen several articles on this general topic in the last few days.  Terminal illness, for example.  Should we review these and find ways to improve them as a coherent group?  WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:45, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Needs lots of work

message: The appalling problem with your current page is that at no stage do you seem to consider that physicians are merely 'service providers', and that the decision that a patient is at the 'end of their life' and not worthy of any further treatment can only be made BY THE PATIENT - you are expressing an archaic view that patients have to accept whatever prognosis they are given, and can't just walk away and seek attention from practitioners who are as game for a shot at life extension as they are.  The level of deliberate 'upstaging' of cancer in elderly patients in the uk , for example, is disgraceful.  There is absolutely no evidence that cancer treatments are any less effective in 'elderly ' patients than in the young, and fitness to undergo them are the main criteria for efficacy and survival - sadly, the performance indicator of fitness for treatment (the Karnofsky status') is subjective, and can be fiddled by any practitioner whose waiting list is attracting complaints from Managerial Employers.  The entire 'liverpool pathway' scheme is full of drugs that hasten death under the guise of relieving symptoms - informed consent to cease treatments means that patients are told the truth, but here in the uk, elderly citizens will be told a load of old hooey, and sadly, are of a generation who trust authority absolutely.  I dont like the notion that there is anything called 'end of life' - 'palliative medicine' can include dialysis for example, and keep someone alive for a decade, but if a patient is 70, as things stand, they can be told they are at the 'end of their life' if they live in an area with a shortage of dialysis provision, and have to accept it.    —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sheriffspayne (talk • contribs) 15:33, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Licenced Murder?

message: I'd like to add a link to a Survivorship A to Z article on end-of-life issues - the article is here. It provides additional information and resources for people experiencing end-of-life issues. What do you think?
Prestonmarkstone (talk) 17:31, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link Proposal 

message: The Congress of the USA had hoped that the 1991 Patient Self Determination Act together with the 1986 Hospice Care Entitlement that is reimbursed by Medicare would greatly reduce expensive end-of-life care in  Intensive Care and Critical Units of US Acute Care Hospitals when  elderly/disabled terminal patients on Medicare  would freely choose to shorten their lives to shorten their suffering from  terminal illnesses and die in their own personal residences or in nursing-home residences.  However,  since the physicians and for-profit clinics were not placed under the provisions of the 1991 PSDA and the states didn't implement the goals of the 1991 PSDA in state laws,   the Hospice Entitlement paid for out of the Medicare Purse has failed to achieve the savings anticipated in the 1991 PSDA.
I was unable to find a neutral source for any of this and I have serious doubts on substantial parts of this, such as Congressional intent. In addition, style seems to be off - we don't use, e.g., "Congress of the USA", conjunctions, or "Medicare Purse". L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 22:14, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Per this dispute, and because no one has objected, I am semi-BOLDly removing the disputed section. L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 05:03, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  US national perspective - dispute 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on End-of-life care. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090801102113/http://www.goodmedicine.org/ to http://www.goodmedicine.org/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:20, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This section seems relevant, but when I checked the reference I saw that it is a text about cancer patients, whose generalization for all cases of end-of-life car is not stated. I have no grounds in healthcare, but for me there's no clear evidence that it's something applicable for different health conditions. I think someone in the field should check it and make proper clarifications if necessary, or bring another source (or even clarifying that it's just for cancer, if the case). Bruno Moreira-Guedes (talk) 22:23, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Signs that death may be near 

message: Hey all,
Removed a sentence from the end of the lead section, which read as follows:
While I think there's probably some value in this piece of information, it was not useful where it was at the time of writing at the end of the lead section, and I couldn't easily find another place to put it. The phrasing also needs work. Thanks. JeanLackE (talk) 05:12, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of sentence 

message: — Assignment last updated by Nbear93 (talk) 17:21, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: UCSF SOM Inquiry In Action-- Wikipedia Editing 2022

message: I like the Conciseness of EoL introduction section, but did identify some contradicting information. In the introduction it states that EoL Care refers to the healthcare provided to an individual, but then the linked "Healthcare" page states that this is care provided by health professionals and allied members, but in the intro of this page it states that EoL care encompasses the care being provided by family members (that may not have any sort of health professional training). Clarification of this would be helpful. 
I really like the addition/update of the "Disparities in end-of-life care" section. It is a very important topic to better understand where disparities may be present. I would suggest not using language such as "good access" and instead be more descriptive. In addition, the inclusion of outcomes data from the systematic review would be helpful to gain a better understanding of the extent of the disparities.
Additions to the Spirituality and Religion section are interesting and are helpful in providing some context to the many layers of EoL Care.  Alej.chavez (talk) 20:37, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Feedback for UCSF SOM Inquiry in Action -- Wikipedia Editing 2022