{"title":"Enhancing palliative care through university-community partnerships: a systematic review of models, impacts, and challenges.","authors":"Alaka Chandak, Priyadarshini Bhalchandra Kulkarni","doi":"10.1186/s12904-025-01795-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>University-community partnerships (UCPs) represent a transformative model for integrating student experiential learning with community-based palliative care. These partnerships enhance empathy, interdisciplinary collaboration, and service delivery, while addressing gaps in end-of-life care.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>This systematic review evaluated the effectiveness of UCPs in palliative care, focusing on their impact on student learning, community outcomes, and innovative practices.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Following the PRISMA 2020 guidelines, a systematic search was conducted across PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and CINAHL databases for studies published between January 2014 and March 2024. This search yielded 206 unique citations. Nine studies were included after the full-text screening. Grey literature sources (e.g., reports and web-based articles) were screened but excluded due to insufficient methodological rigor, and thematic synthesis was conducted using NVivo, with two independent reviewers performing data extraction. The Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBIS (qualitative) and RoB 2 (quantitative) tools.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 206 records screened, nine studies (eight qualitative and one quantitative) met the inclusion criteria. The identified UCP models include transactional, transformational, and community-based participatory research (CBPR), with CBPR noted for contextual adaptability. UCPs contributed to improving student empathy, interprofessional learning, and community empowerment. Barriers include limited resources, cultural mismatches, and inconsistent stakeholder alignments. Innovations, such as telehealth and virtual learning, were also observed.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>UCPs have strong potential to enhance palliative care education and delivery. Scaling these models requires sustainable funding, culturally responsive approaches, and policy integration. Future research must emphasize longitudinal designs and standardized evaluation structures.</p>","PeriodicalId":48945,"journal":{"name":"BMC Palliative Care","volume":"24 1","pages":"160"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12144803/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Palliative Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12904-025-01795-2","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: University-community partnerships (UCPs) represent a transformative model for integrating student experiential learning with community-based palliative care. These partnerships enhance empathy, interdisciplinary collaboration, and service delivery, while addressing gaps in end-of-life care.
Aim: This systematic review evaluated the effectiveness of UCPs in palliative care, focusing on their impact on student learning, community outcomes, and innovative practices.
Methods: Following the PRISMA 2020 guidelines, a systematic search was conducted across PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and CINAHL databases for studies published between January 2014 and March 2024. This search yielded 206 unique citations. Nine studies were included after the full-text screening. Grey literature sources (e.g., reports and web-based articles) were screened but excluded due to insufficient methodological rigor, and thematic synthesis was conducted using NVivo, with two independent reviewers performing data extraction. The Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBIS (qualitative) and RoB 2 (quantitative) tools.
Results: Of the 206 records screened, nine studies (eight qualitative and one quantitative) met the inclusion criteria. The identified UCP models include transactional, transformational, and community-based participatory research (CBPR), with CBPR noted for contextual adaptability. UCPs contributed to improving student empathy, interprofessional learning, and community empowerment. Barriers include limited resources, cultural mismatches, and inconsistent stakeholder alignments. Innovations, such as telehealth and virtual learning, were also observed.
Conclusion: UCPs have strong potential to enhance palliative care education and delivery. Scaling these models requires sustainable funding, culturally responsive approaches, and policy integration. Future research must emphasize longitudinal designs and standardized evaluation structures.
背景：大学-社区伙伴关系（UCPs）代表了一种将学生体验式学习与社区姑息治疗相结合的变革模式。这些伙伴关系加强了共情、跨学科合作和服务提供，同时解决了临终关怀方面的差距。目的：本系统综述评估了ucp在姑息治疗中的有效性，重点关注其对学生学习、社区成果和创新实践的影响。方法：根据PRISMA 2020指南，系统检索PubMed、Scopus、Web of Science和CINAHL数据库，检索2014年1月至2024年3月间发表的研究。这个搜索产生了206个独特的引用。在全文筛选后纳入了9项研究。灰色文献来源（如报告和基于网络的文章）被筛选，但由于方法不够严谨而被排除，并使用NVivo进行专题综合，由两名独立审稿人进行数据提取。使用ROBIS（定性）和rob2（定量）工具评估偏倚风险。结果：在筛选的206份记录中，有9项研究（8项定性研究和1项定量研究）符合纳入标准。确定的UCP模型包括事务性、转换性和基于社区的参与性研究（CBPR）， CBPR以上下文适应性而闻名。ucp有助于提高学生的同理心、跨专业学习和社区赋权。障碍包括有限的资源、文化不匹配和不一致的涉众联盟。还观察到远程保健和虚拟学习等创新。结论：ucp在加强姑息治疗教育和实施方面具有很强的潜力。扩展这些模式需要可持续的资金、文化响应方法和政策整合。今后的研究必须强调纵向设计和标准化评价结构。
期刊介绍：
BMC Palliative Care is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in the clinical, scientific, ethical and policy issues, local and international, regarding all aspects of hospice and palliative care for the dying and for those with profound suffering related to chronic illness.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
