'My life is a mess but I cope': An analysis of the language children and young people use to describe their own life-limiting or life-threatening condition.

BACKGROUND: Children and young people with life-limiting and life-threatening conditions have multidimensional needs and heterogenous cognitive and communicative abilities. There is limited evidence to support clinicians to tailor their communication to each individual child. AIM: To explore the language children and young people use to describe their own condition, to inform strategies for discussing needs and priorities. DESIGN: Positioned within a social constructivist paradigm, a secondary discourse analysis of semi-structured interview data was conducted incorporating the discourse dynamics approach for figurative language. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: A total of 26 children and young people aged 5-17 years with life-limiting or life-threatening conditions (6 cancer; 20 non-cancer) were recruited from nine clinical services (six hospitals and three hospices) across two UK nations. RESULTS: The language children and young people use positions them as 'experts in their condition'. They combine medical terminology with their preferred terms for their body to describe symptoms and treatments, and use comparatives and superlatives to communicate their health status. Their language depicts their condition as a 'series of (functional and social) losses', which single them out from their peers as 'the sick one'. Older children and young people also incorporate figurative language to expand their descriptions. CONCLUSION/DISCUSSION: Children and young people can provide rich descriptions of their condition. Paying attention to their lexical choices, and converging one's language towards theirs, may enable more child-centred discussions. Expanding discussions about 'what matters most' with consideration of the losses and differences they have experienced may facilitate a fuller assessment of their concerns, preferences and priorities.

What are the anticipated benefits, risks, barriers and facilitators to implementing person-centred outcome measures into routine care for children and young people with life-limiting and life-threatening conditions? A qualitative interview study with key stakeholders.

BACKGROUND: There is a growing evidence-base underpinning implementation of person-centred outcome measures into adult palliative care. However evidence on how best to achieve this with children facing life-threatening and life-limiting conditions is limited. AIM: To identify the anticipated benefits, risks, barriers and facilitators to implementing person-centred outcome measures for children with life-limiting and life-threatening conditions. DESIGN: Cross-sectional qualitative semi-structured interview study with key stakeholders analysed using Framework analysis informed by the adapted-Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: A total of n = 26 children with life-limiting or life-threatening conditions, n = 40 parents/carers, n = 13 siblings and n = 15 health and social care professionals recruited from six hospitals and three children's hospices and n = 12 Commissioners of health services. RESULTS: All participants were supportive of future implementation of person-centred outcome measures into care. Anticipated benefits included: better understanding of patient and family priorities, improved communication and collaborative working between professionals and families and standardisation in data collection and reporting. Anticipated risks included increased workload for staff and measures not being used as intended. Implementation barriers included: acceptability and usability of outcome measures by children; burden and capacity of parents/carers regarding completion; privacy concerns; and language barriers. Implementation facilitators included designing measures using language that is meaningful to children and families, ensuring potential benefits of person-centred outcome measures are communicated to encourage 'buy-in' and administering measures with known and trusted professional. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of person-centred outcome measures offer potential benefits for children with life-limiting and life-threatening conditions. Eight recommendations are made to maximise benefits and minimise risks in implementation.

Cognitive testing of the Children's Palliative Outcome Scale (C-POS) with children, young people and their parents/carers.

BACKGROUND: The Children's Palliative Outcome Scale (C-POS) is being developed using best methodological guidance on outcome measure development, This recommends cognitive testing, an established method of item improvement, prior to psychometric testing. AIM: To cognitively test C-POS within the target population to establish comprehensibility, comprehensiveness, relevance and acceptability. DESIGN: Cross-sectional cognitive interview study following COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) methodology and Rothrock guidance on outcome measure development. Cognitive interviews were conducted using 'think aloud' and verbal probing techniques. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Children 5-⩽17 years old with life-limiting conditions and parents/carers of children with life-limiting conditions were recruited from 14 UK sites. RESULTS: Forty-eight individuals participated (36 parents; 12 children) in cognitively testing the five versions of C-POS over two to seven rounds. Content and length were acceptable, and all questions were considered important. Refinements were made to parent/carer versions to be inclusive of non-verbal children such as changing 'share' to 'express' feelings; and 'being able to ask questions' to 'having the appropriate information'. Changes to improve comprehensibility of items such as 'living life to the fullest' were also made. Parents reported that completing an outcome measure can be distressing but this is anticipated and that being asked is important. CONCLUSION: Cognitive interviewing has facilitated refinement of the C-POS, especially for non-verbal children who represent a large proportion of those with a life-limiting condition. This study has enhanced the face and content validity of the measure and provided preliminary evidence for acceptability for use in routine practice.

What are the barriers and facilitators to advance care planning with older people in long-term care facilities? A qualitative study.

AIM: To explore the views and preferences for advance care planning from the perspectives of residents, family members and healthcare professionals in long-term care facilities. DESIGN: A qualitative descriptive design. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 12 residents of long-term care facilities, 10 family members and 14 healthcare professionals. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. The social ecological model was used to develop implementation recommendations. RESULTS: We constructed a conceptual model of barriers and facilitators to advance care planning in long-term care facilities, drawing upon four dominant themes from the qualitative analysis: (1) The absence of discourse on end-of-life care: a lack of cultural climate to talk about death, the unspoken agreement to avoid conversations about death, and poor awareness of palliative care may hinder advance care planning initiation; (2) Relational decision-making process is a dual factor affecting advance care planning engagement; (3) Low trust and 'unsafe' cultures: a lack of honest information sharing, risks of violating social expectations and damaging social relationships, and risks of legal consequences may hinder willingness to engage in advance care planning; (4) Meeting and respecting residents' psychosocial needs: these can be addressed by readiness assessment, initiating advance care planning in an informal and equal manner and involving social workers. CONCLUSION: Our findings show that residents' voices were not being heard. It is necessary to identify residents' spontaneous conversation triggers, articulate the value of advance care planning in light of the family's values and preferences, and respect residents' psychosocial needs to promote advance care planning in long-term care facilities. Advance care planning may alleviate the decision-making burden of offspring in nuclear families. IMPLICATIONS FOR CLINICAL PRACTICE: The evidence-based recommendations in this study will inform the implementation of context-specific advance care planning in Asia-Pacific regions. PATIENT AND PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Patients and caregivers contributed to the interview pilot and data collection.

Does the impact of bereavement vary between same and different gender partnerships? A representative national, cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Data suggest poorer bereavement outcomes for lesbian, gay and bisexual people, but this has not been estimated in population-based research. This study compared bereavement outcomes for partners of same-gender and different-gender decedents. METHODS: In this population-based, cross-sectional survey of people bereaved of a civil partner or spouse 6-10 months previously, we used adjusted logistic and linear regression to investigate outcomes of interest: (1) positive screen on Inventory of Complicated Grief (ICG), (2) positive screen on General Health Questionnaire (GHQ), (3) grief intensity (ICG) and (4) psychiatric symptoms (GHQ-12). RESULTS: Among 233 same-gender partners and 329 of different-gender partners, 66.1% [95% confidence interval (CI) 60.0-72.2] and 59.2% [95% CI (53.9-64.6)] respectively screened positive for complicated grief on the ICG, whilst 76.0% [95% CI (70.5-81.5)] and 69.3% [95% CI (64.3-74.3)] respectively screened positive on the GHQ-12. Same-gender bereaved partners were not significantly more likely to screen positive for complicated grief than different-gender partners [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.56, 95% CI (0.98-2.47)], p = 0.059, but same-gender bereaved partners were significantly more likely to screen for psychiatric caseness [aOR 1.67 (1.02, 2.71) p = 0.043]. We similarly found no significant association of partner gender with grief intensity [B = 1.86, 95% CI (-0.91to 4.63), p = 0.188], but significantly greater psychological distress for same-gender partners [B = 1.54, 95% CI (-0.69-2.40), p < 0.001]. CONCLUSIONS: Same-gender bereaved partners report significantly more psychological distress. In view of their poorer sub-clinical mental health, clinical and bereavement services should refine screening processes to identify those at risk of poor mental health outcomes.

Implementation of child-centred outcome measures in routine paediatric healthcare practice: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Person-centred outcome measures (PCOMs) are commonly used in routine adult healthcare to measure and improve outcomes, but less attention has been paid to PCOMs in children's services. The aim of this systematic review is to identify and synthesise existing evidence of the determinants, strategies, and mechanisms that influence the implementation of PCOMs into paediatric healthcare practice. METHODS: The review was conducted and reported in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Databased searched included CINAHL, Embase, Medline, and PsycInfo. Google scholar was also searched for grey literature on 25th March 2022. Studies were included if the setting was a children's healthcare service, investigating the implementation or use of an outcome measure or screening tool in healthcare practice, and reported outcomes relating to use of a measure. Data were tabulated and thematically analysed through deductive coding to the constructs of the adapted-Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Results were presented as a narrative synthesis, and a logic model developed. RESULTS: We retained 69 studies, conducted across primary (n = 14), secondary (n = 13), tertiary (n = 37), and community (n = 8) healthcare settings, including both child self-report (n = 46) and parent-proxy (n = 47) measures. The most frequently reported barriers to measure implementation included staff lack of knowledge about how the measure may improve care and outcomes; the complexity of using and implementing the measure; and a lack of resources to support implementation and its continued use including funding and staff. The most frequently reported facilitators of implementation and continued use include educating and training staff and families on: how to implement and use the measure; the advantages of using PCOMs over current practice; and the benefit their use has on patient care and outcomes. The resulting logic model presents the mechanisms through which strategies can reduce the barriers to implementation and support the use of PCOMs in practice. CONCLUSIONS: These findings can be used to support the development of context-specific implementation plans through a combination of existing strategies. This will enable the implementation of PCOMs into routine paediatric healthcare practice to empower settings to better identify and improve child-centred outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Prospero CRD 42022330013.

Achieving consensus on priority items for paediatric palliative care outcome measurement: Results from a modified Delphi survey, engagement with a children's research involvement group and expert item generation.

BACKGROUND: There is no validated outcome measure for use in children's palliative care outside sub-Saharan Africa. Stakeholders must be involved in the development of such measures to ensure face and content validity. AIM: To gain expert stakeholder consensus on items for inclusion in a paediatric palliative care outcome measure to establish face and content validity. DESIGN: This study was conducted in two phases following Rothrock and COSMIN guidance on patient-reported outcome measure development. Phase 1: Three-round modified Delphi survey to establish consensus on priority items. Phase 2: Item generation meeting with key stakeholders to develop initial measure versions. A young person's advisory group was also consulted on priority outcomes. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Delphi survey: Parents and professionals with experience of caring for a child with a life-limiting condition. Young person's advisory group: young people age 10-20 years. Item generation meeting: bereaved parents, academics and clinicians. RESULTS: Phase 1: Delphi survey (n = 82). Agreement increased from Kendall's W = 0.17 to W = 0.61, indicating movement towards consensus. Agreement between professional and parent ranking was poor (Cohen's kappa 0.13). Professionals prioritised physical symptoms, whereas parents prioritised psychosocial and practical concerns. Advisory group: Children (n = 22) prioritised items related to living a 'normal life' in addition to items prioritised by adult participants. Phase 2: Five age/developmental stage appropriate child and proxy-reported versions of C-POS, containing 13 items, were drafted. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the importance and feasibility of involving key stakeholders in PROM item generation, as important differences were found in the priority outcomes identified by children, parents and professionals.

Palliative and end-of-life care needs, experiences, and preferences of LGBTQ+ individuals with serious illness: A systematic mixed-methods review.

BACKGROUND: Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer/questioning (LGBTQ+) individuals experience discrimination throughout the care continuum, including during serious illness and at end of life. High-quality palliative care requires that health professionals deliver individualized services that reflect the needs, experiences, and preferences of LGBTQ+ persons. AIM: To identify and appraise existing evidence related to the needs, experiences, and preferences for palliative and end of life care among LGBTQ+ individuals with serious illness. DESIGN: Data-based convergent synthesis design reported per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Scopus from January 1, 2010 to November 6, 2020. RESULTS: Of 4875 results captured, 69 articles underwent full-text review and 13 were retained for analysis. Most studies were from North America with trans individuals represented in 10 of 13 studies. Needs (n = 6) included increased social support, institutional safety, economic and legal supports, and advocacy to mitigate health barriers.Experiences (n = 12) were driven by fear and worry associated with discrimination/stigma,providers' hetero-/cisnormative assumptions, homophobia and transphobia, social isolation, and an undignified death. Preferences (n = 6) pertained to inclusion of chosen families in decision-making, disclosure of LGBTQ+ identity based on safety of the clinical environment, and a desire to maintain autonomy. CONCLUSIONS: The robustness of the science has improved regarding the needs, experiences, and preferences of trans individuals. Actionable, inclusive policies coupled with sustained and integrated cultural sensitivity training for health workers are mandatory. Interventional research is critical to enhance tailored palliative care for LGBTQ+ people and their chosen families.

LGBT+ partner bereavement and appraisal of the Acceptance-Disclosure Model of LGBT+ bereavement: A qualitative interview study.

BACKGROUND: Support from social networks is vital after the death of a partner. Lesbian, gay, bisexual and/or transgender (LGBT+) people can face disenfranchisement and isolation in bereavement. The Acceptance-Disclosure Model (of LGBT+ bereavement) posits that experiences are shaped by the extent to which individuals feel able to disclose their bereavement to others, and whether that loss is acknowledged appropriately. AIM: To explore LGBT+ specific experiences of partner bereavement; determine decision-making processes regarding disclosure of relationships/identities; and appraise the Acceptance-Disclosure Model using primary qualitative data. DESIGN: Exploratory in-depth qualitative interview study positioned within a social constructivist paradigm. Data were analysed using inductive and deductive reflexive thematic analysis. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: 21 LGBT+ people from across England bereaved of their civil partner/spouse. RESULTS: Participants described LGBT+ specific stressors in bereavement: lack of recognition of their loss; inappropriate questioning; unwanted disclosure of gender history; and fears of discrimination when accessing support. Disclosure of LGBT+ identities varied across social networks. Some participants described hiding their identities and bereavement to preserve relationships, and challenging intersections between LGBT+ identities and other aspects of culture or self. These findings provide primary evidence to support the Acceptance-Disclosure Model. CONCLUSIONS: LGBT+ people face additional stressors in bereavement. Not all LGBT+ people want to talk directly about their relationships/identities. Sensitive exploration of support needs, aligned with preferences around disclosure of identities, can help foster trust. Five recommendations for inclusive practice are presented. Further research should consider whether the Acceptance-Disclosure Model has utility to explain bereavement experiences for other isolated or disenfranchised groups.

Spiritual, religious, and existential concerns of children and young people with life-limiting and life-threatening conditions: A qualitative interview study.

BACKGROUND: Despite being a core domain of palliative care, primary data on spiritual and existential concerns has rarely been collected among children with life-limiting and life-threatening conditions and their families. Existing evidence has tended to focus on the religious aspects among children with cancer. AIM: To identify the spiritual needs of children with life-limiting and life-threatening conditions. DESIGN: Cross-sectional semi-structured, qualitative interview study with children, families and health and social care professionals. Verbatim transcripts were analysed using Framework analysis. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Purposively sampled children with life-limiting and life-threatening conditions, their parents and siblings, health and social care professionals recruited from six hospitals and three children's hospices in the UK, and commissioners of paediatric palliative care services recruited through networks and a national charity. RESULTS: One hundred six participants were interviewed: 26 children (5-17 years), 53 family members (parents/carers of children 0-17 years and siblings (5-17 years)), 27 professionals (health and social care professionals and commissioners of paediatric palliative care). Themes included: living life to the fullest, meaning of life and leaving a legacy, uncertainty about the future, determination to survive, accepting or fighting the future and role of religion. Children as young as 5 years old identified needs or concerns in the spiritual domain of care. CONCLUSIONS: Addressing spiritual concerns is essential to providing child- and family-centred palliative care. Eliciting spiritual concerns may enable health and social care professionals to identify the things that can support and enhance a meaningful life and legacy for children and their families.

Achieving child-centred care for children and young people with life-limiting and life-threatening conditions-a qualitative interview study.

This study aims to identify the symptoms, concerns, and care priorities of children with life-limiting conditions and their families. A semi-structured qualitative interview study was conducted, seeking perspectives from multiple stakeholders on symptoms, other concerns, and care priorities of children and young people with life limiting and life-threatening conditions and their families. Participants were recruited from six hospitals and three children's hospices in the UK. Verbatim transcripts were analysed using framework analysis. A total of 106 participants were recruited: 26 children (5-17 years), 40 parents (of children 0-17 years), 13 siblings (5-17 years), 15 health and social care professionals, 12 commissioners. Participants described many inter-related symptoms, concerns, and care priorities impacting on all aspects of life. Burdensome symptoms included pain and seizures. Participants spoke of the emotional and social impacts of living with life-limiting conditions, such as being able to see friends, and accessing education and psychological support. Spiritual/existential concerns included the meaning of illness and planning for an uncertain future. Data revealed an overarching theme of pursuing 'normality', described as children's desire to undertake usual childhood activities. Parents need support with practical aspects of care to help realise this desire for normality. CONCLUSION: Children with life-limiting conditions and their families experience a wide range of inter-related symptoms, concerns, and care priorities. A holistic, child-centred approach to care is needed, allowing focus on pursuit of normal childhood activities. Improvements in accessibility, co-ordination, and availability of health services are required to achieve this. WHAT IS KNOWN: • Existing evidence regarding symptoms, concerns, and care priorities for children with life-limiting conditions is largely limited to proxy-reported data and those with a cancer diagnosis. • Child-centred care provision must be directed by children's perspectives on their priorities for care. WHAT IS NEW: • Social and educational activities are more important to children with life-limiting conditions than their medical concerns. • A holistic approach to care is required that extends beyond addressing medical needs, in order to support children with life-limiting conditions to focus on pursuit of normal childhood activities.

Reflective insights from developing a palliative care children and young people's advisory group.

BACKGROUND: The importance of actively involving patient and public members throughout the different stages of palliative care and health research projects is widely acknowledged, however patient and public involvement work rarely considers insight from children and young people. Although this is becoming increasingly recognised in other areas of research, there is currently no structured guidance on how to best involve children and young people in palliative care research. AIM: To plan and deliver a Young People's Advisory Group in palliative care and health research at a secondary school. FINDINGS: Attending an after-school 'Health and Social Research Methods Club' for 11 weeks benefitted children and researchers. Children were taught about data collection methods, data analysis and ethics in health research and used these skills to provide valuable feedback which has been implemented in current palliative care research projects. Children took part in considered discussions around palliative care topics and enjoyed attending the group. CONCLUSION: This project has equipped researchers with skills and provided a structured template for future Young People's Advisory Groups, ensuring the unique voices of children and young people are considered and valued in future palliative care research.

Holistic Experiences and Strategies for Conducting Research With Couples.

In this article, we outline methodological considerations for conducting research interviews with couples. We draw from two qualitative men's health studies, both developed to explore social interactions between men and their partners of either sex in relation to their health practices. We utilized a combination of separate interviews and joint couple interviews. From these studies, we offer insight into our experiences of using both types of interview styles, addressing four key areas which span elements across the research project journey: (a) choosing a mode of interview, (b) ethical concerns in couple research,

Heterosexual couples and prostate cancer support groups: a gender relations analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Men diagnosed with prostate cancer (PCa) can receive supportive care from an array of sources including female partners and prostate cancer support groups (PCSGs). However, little is known about how heterosexual gender relations and supportive care play out among couples who attend PCSGs. Distilling such gender relation patterns is a key to understanding and advancing supportive care for men who experience PCa and their families. PURPOSE: This study describes connections between heterosexual gender relations and PCa supportive care among couples who attend PCSGs. METHOD: In-depth, individual interviews with 30 participants (15 men treated for PCa and their female partners) were analyzed using interpretive descriptive methods. Couples were asked about their relationships, supportive care needs, and attendance at PCSGs. A heterosexual gender relations framework was used to theorize the findings. RESULTS: Findings showed that traditional heterosexual gender relations guided most couples' PCa-related support both in and out of PCSGs. Three themes were inductively derived: "Not pushing too hard"-balancing women's support with men's autonomy, "Confreres"-men supporting men at PCSGs, and "Women are better at reassuring"-support from and for women. CONCLUSIONS: Couples both aligned to and resisted traditional gender roles to accommodate, explain, and rationalize how, as a couple, they approached PCa supportive care needs.

Masculinities, humour and care for penile cancer: a qualitative study.

AIM: To explore how men with penile cancer construct humour in relation to their diagnosis and treatment. BACKGROUND: Functionalist, relief and incongruity theories attempt to account for humour, but there is a dearth of empirical evidence in nursing care. This is particularly so in relation to a condition like penile cancer where some nurses think that humour in their interactions with patients would be inappropriate. DESIGN: The study employed a participative, mixed-qualitative-methods design. METHOD: Focus groups and patient-conducted interviews were both used during a one-day 'pilot workshop' in March 2011. The data were initially analysed using framework analysis. This paper explores the theme of humour in depth. FINDINGS: Humour helped participants make light of their condition, which meant that they could laugh about the consequences of treatment ('laughing about urination') and build rapport with health professionals ('humour with health professionals'). Nevertheless, the use of humour was less important than the treatment of their cancer ('humour discounted') and there was a fear that they would be subject to ridicule because of their condition ('fear of ridicule'). CONCLUSION: The findings suggest a combination of functionalist, relief and incongruity theories of humour; the emotions these men experience are contained (functionalist) and released (relief) through humorous interaction, and the potential for comedy lies in an incongruity between what is expected socially and the experiences of these men, for example, around expectations that men use urinals in public toilets. Nurses should continue to use humour to build rapport with patients, should they judge this to be appropriate, although they may want to avoid jokes about sexual and urinary functioning until after treatment.

What contributes to promote sexual health in cancer palliative care? A realist review.

INTRODUCTION: Sexuality is an important determinant of the overall health of a population and remains so at the end of life and in patients with advanced cancers. Despite the abundant literature on sexuality and intimacy, these topics have been rarely discussed in the context of cancer palliative care, and very few interventions to promote sexual health in patients undergoing cancer palliative care have been explored. OBJECTIVES: In this study we sought to identify which factors and mechanisms contribute to promoting sexual health in cancer palliative care. METHODS: A realist review was performed according to the guidelines of the realist and meta-narrative evidence synthesis method guidelines. Articles published between January 2010 and June 2021 were searched in 4 databases. Records were screened for their relevance regarding a predefined list of context-mechanism-outcome (CMO) configurations. Abstracts were independently screened by 2 authors before the data were extracted from the full-text articles selected for inclusion. With the use of abductive and retroductive reasoning techniques, each article was examined for evidence of its contribution to one of the CMO configurations, which could be refined when relevant. The data were summarized according to the final CMO configurations. RESULTS: Of the 2056 articles identified, 38 articles were included in the review. The data reported in these articles contributed to 7 CMO hypotheses: (1) improving communication skills, (2) healthcare provider training, (3) reorganizing the patient environment in care settings or at home, (4) managing sexual symptoms and also general symptoms, (5 and 6) patient-centered counseling or couple counseling, and (7) lifting the taboo. CONCLUSIONS: The findings reported here highlight various ways to improve sexual health for patients in cancer palliative care but are limited to genital cancers. Further research should consider all types of cancer rather than being restricted to genital cancers.

Hidden From Sight-From the Closet to the Paywall: A Rapid Evaluation of Restricted and Monetized Access to LGBTQ+ Inclusive Palliative, End-of-Life, and Bereavement Care Research.

INTRODUCTION: LGBTQ+ people experience higher burdens of life-limiting illnesses, poorer health outcomes, and multilevel barriers to accessing palliative, end-of-life, and bereavement care. High quality evidence is needed to inform interventions to address these inequities, and inform inclusive practices and policies. Despite global initiatives to improve availability of peer-reviewed journal articles, the minority of research is open access (OA). We aimed to evaluate accessibility of literature related to LGBTQ+ inclusive palliative, end-of-life, and bereavement care. METHODS: A rapid review of the evidence regarding LGBTQ+ inclusive palliative, end-of-life, and bereavement care was conducted; OA status of identified articles was assessed. Articles from three published systematic reviews were included (2012, 2016, and 2020). Review articles were updated using the original search and inclusion/exclusion strategies. RESULTS: 66 articles related to LGBTQ+ inclusive palliative, end-of-life and bereavement care were identified between 1990-2022. Of these, only 21% (n=14) were OA. Of the OA articles, 79% were published between 2017 and 2022, and 50% were published between 2020-2022, reflecting more recent shifts towards OA publishing. DISCUSSION: Health and social care professionals and policy makers rely on access to high quality evidence to inform their work. Failing to make articles related to the needs of LGBTQ+ people and populations OA risks further marginalisation and worsened inequities. Innovative journal policies and funding are needed to enable access, particularly for research that foregrounds the needs of marginalised communities. Where articles are currently behind paywalls, there is a need for accessible summaries or policy briefs to inform inclusive policy and practice.

Between loss and restoration: The role of liminality in advancing theories of grief and bereavement.

A recent national survey of bereaved partners found high levels of complicated grief and psychological distress, with evidence that loneliness and isolation may contribute to these outcomes. However, the mechanisms of action for this have not been explored. To advance grief theory this paper reports analysis of the survey free-text data to examine the relationship between social support and emotional responses to bereavement. Individuals bereaved of a civil partner or spouse 6-10 months previously were identified through death registration data. 569/1945 (29 %) completed surveys were received. Of those, 311 participants (55 %) provided responses to two free-text questions which asked about their 'feelings since the death of their partner or spouse', and 'about the support around' them. Data were analysed using corpus-assisted discourse analysis and the discourse dynamics approach for figurative language. Participants described diverse emotional responses to the bereavement (e.g. sadness, anger, denial, acceptance), and the value of formal and informal bereavement support. Although many of the experiences described are accounted for in existing grief theory, some participants described a liminal experience not recognised within these theories. They felt trapped, unable to engage with loss or restoration, and unable to move forward as their planned future no longer existed. They sought out 'communitas' (solidarity in experiences), but often found support from their social networks had diminished. Metaphors were used to describe this liminality, with partner grief expressed as a dark agentic force, a monster, an abyss, and as water. The findings of this study offer original insights into experiences and trajectories of bereavement, and our understandings of prolonged or complicated grief. A novel model 'Between Loss and Restoration' is presented to include these experiences. Recognition of the place for liminality within the spectrum of grief experiences could enhance grief literacy and improve formal and informal bereavement support provision.

LGBTQIA+ inclusion in the global health policy agenda: A critical discourse analysis of the Lancet Commission report archive.

CONTEXT: LGBTQIA+ people worldwide experience discrimination, violence, and stigma that lead to poor health outcomes. Policy plays a crucial role in ensuring health equity and safety for LGBTQIA+ communities. Given Lancet Commissions' substantial impact on health policy across domains, we aimed to determine how LGBTQIA+ communities and their care needs are incorporated throughout Lancet Commission reports and recommendations. METHODS: Using critical discourse analysis, we analyzed 102 Commissions for inclusion of and reference to LGBTQIA+ communities using 36 key terms. Three levels of analysis were conducted: 1) micro-level (overview of terminology use); 2) meso-level (visibility and placement of LGBTQIA+ references); and 3) macro-level (outlining characterizations and framing of references with consideration of broader social discourses). FINDINGS: 36 of 102 (35%) Commissions referenced LGBTQIA+ communities with 801 mentions in total. There were minimal (9/36) references made in the "Executive Summary," "Recommendations," and/or "Key Messages" sections of reports. LGBTQIA+ communities were most frequently discussed in reports related to HIV/AIDS and sexual and reproductive health. Few Commissions related to public health, or chronic conditions (9/60) referenced LGBTQIA+ communities. Some reports made non-specific or unexplained references; many discussed the LGBTQIA+ population without specific reference to sub-groups. LGBTQIA+ communities were often listed alongside other marginalized groups without rationale or a description of shared needs or experiences. We identified framings (legal, vulnerability, risk) and characterizations (as victims, as blameworthy, as a problem) of LGBTQIA+ communities that contribute to problematizing discourse. CONCLUSIONS: LGBTQIA+ people were rarely included in the Commissions, resulting in an inadvertent marginalization of their health needs. Policy initiatives must consider LGBTQIA+ groups from a strengths-based rather than problematizing perspective, integrating evidence-based approaches alongside community-based stakeholder engagement to mitigate inequities and promote inclusive care and policymaking.