Abstract
Background Serious illness is characterised by uncertainty, particularly in older age groups. Uncertainty may be experienced by patients, family carers, and health professionals about a broad variety of issues. There are many evidence gaps regarding the experience and management of uncertainty.
Aim We aimed to identify priority research areas concerning uncertainty in serious illness, to ensure that future research better meets the needs of those affected by uncertainty and reduce research inefficiencies.
Methods Rapid prioritisation workshop comprising five focus groups to identify research areas, followed by a ranking exercise to prioritise them. Participants were healthcare professionals caring for those with serious illnesses including geriatrics, palliative care, intensive care; researchers; patient/carer representatives, and policymakers. Descriptive analysis of ranking data and qualitative framework analysis of focus group transcripts was undertaken.
Results Thirty-four participants took part; 67% female, mean age 47 (range 33 – 67). The highest priority was communication of uncertainty, ranked first by 15 participants (overall ranking score 1.59/3). Subsequent priorities were: 2) How to cope with uncertainty; 3) healthcare professional education/training; 4) Optimising clinical approaches to uncertainty; and 5) exploring in-depth experiences of uncertainty. Research related to optimally managing uncertainty was given higher priority than research focusing on experiences of uncertainty and its impact.
Conclusions These co-produced, clinically-focused research priorities map out key evidence gaps concerning uncertainty in serious illness. Managing uncertainty is the most pressing issue, and researchers should prioritise how to optimally manage uncertainty in order to reduce distress, unlock decision paralysis and improve illness and care experience.
Key points
Uncertainty is ubiquitous and distressing in serious illness, and can paralyse decision making
In this consensus exercise, stakeholders identified research priorities for uncertainty in serious illness
Communication of uncertainty was the highest priority
Participants prioritised research concerning managing uncertainty above research to understand experiences of uncertainty
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study and SB is supported by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Applied Research Collaboration East of England (NIHR ARC EoE) at Cambridgeshire and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care. BB is supported by the Wellcome Trust [Grant number 225577/Z/22/Z]. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This study received approval from the University of Cambridge Psychology Research Ethics Committee [Reference:PRE.2022.125].
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All relevant data from the ranking exercise is included within the manuscript and as a supplementary file. Due to ethical restrictions, the focus group transcripts cannot be made publicly available, however we have permission from the University of Cambridge Psychology Research Ethics Committee [Reference:PRE.2022.125] to make anonymised transcripts available to researchers who wish to undertake future related work. We will deposit the transcripts in the University of Cambridge Apollo data repository from the time of publication, with access controlled by the research team.
