. 2025 Apr 10;12:100697. doi: 10.1016/j.apjon.2025.100697

Table 2.

Summary of selected articles.

Author (year)	Country	Design of study	Sample characteristics	Intervention	Outcome tools	Findings
Steinhauser et al. (2008)²⁹	America	Randomized control trial	82 hospice eligible patients (48 cancer patients, 5 heart disease, 10 lung disease, and 19 others). Ages ranged from 28 to 96.	Outlook intervention: Life review, Forgiveness, Heritage & legacy.	Memorial symptom assessment scale, QUAL-E, Rosow-Breslau ADL scale, Profile of Mood states anxiety sub-scale, the CESD short version, the daily spiritual experience scale.	Participants in the active discussion intervention showed improvements in functional status, anxiety, depression, and preparation for end of life (a QUAL-E domain).
Steinhauser et al. (2009)³⁰	America	Randomized control trial (qualitative intervention)	18 patients (60% cancer, 20% lung disease, 7% heart disease, and 7% other life-limiting illnesses). Ages ranged from 28 to 80.	Outlook intervention: Life story, forgiveness, heritage and legacy.	Assess pain and symptoms, anxiety and depression, functional status, and quality of life at the end of life.	Discussions of life completion may improve important health outcomes for patients at the end of life.
Ando et al. (2010)³¹	Japan	Randomized controlled trial	68 terminally ill cancer patients. Male 32, female 36.	Short-term life-review.	The functional assessment of chronic illness therapy-spiritual (FACIT-sp) scale, the hospital anxiety and depression scale (HADS), a numeric scale for psychological suffering, and items from the good death inventory (hope, burden, life completion, and preparation).	The FACIT-sp, hope, life completion, and preparation scores in the intervention group showed significantly greater improvement compared with those of the control group (FACIT-sp, P < 0.001; hope, P < 0.001; life completion, P < 0.001; and preparation, P < 0.001). HADS, burden, and suffering scores in the intervention group also had suggested greater alleviation of suffering compared with the control group (HADS, P < 0.001; burden, P < 0.007; suffering, P < 0.001).
Keall et al. (2013)³²	Australian	A mixed-methods study, included quantitative preintervention and postintervention psychometrics	10 palliative care patients with advanced cancer. Male 5, female 5, ages ranged from 50 to 89.	Outlook intervention: Life story, forgiveness, and legacy.	The Memorial symptom assessment scale, functional assessment of cancer therapy-spirituality well-being, Profile of Mood states, quality of life at end of life scale, and center for epidemiological depression scale.	Patients reported the intervention and assessments to be acceptable and feasible and to be overall positively received although with nonsignificant improvements in measures of “meaning and peace” and “preparation for end of life.”
Steinhauser et al. (2017)³³	America	Randomized controlled trial	221 patients, 46% with metastatic cancer, 96% were males.	Outlook intervention: Life story, forgiveness, and legacy.	QUAL-E, the modified Brief Profile of Mood states, the 10-item center for epidemiological studies-depression scale, the FACT-general FACT-a 27-item survey.	Outlook participants had higher preparation (a validated measure of QOL at the end of life) (mean difference 1.1; 95% CI 0.2, 2.0; P = 0.02) and mean completion (1.6; 95% CI 0.05, 3.1; P = 0.04) at the first but not second post assessment.
Song et al. (2024)²¹	America	Randomized clinical trial	426 patients. Male 208, female 218.	SPIRIT intervention: Assess illness representations, identify goals and concerns, create conditions for conceptual change, introduce replacement information, summarize, and set goals.	The 13-item decisional conflict scale, the hospital anxiety and depression scale.	The intervention group, was superior in dyad congruence on end-of-life care goals, patient decisional conflict, and a composite of dyad congruence and surrogate decision-making confidence.
Gil et al. (2018)³⁴	Spanish	Randomized clinical trial	30 cancer patients. Male 16, female 14.	The meaning-centered psychotherapy Model (MCP): The MCP-palliative care version, the MCP-compassionate palliative care (MCP-CPC).	A brief questionnaire to elicit their perception of the intervention and its utility.	The most helpful elements or constructs reported by patients were meaning, self-compassion, compassion, legacy, and courage and commitment.
Trakoolngamden et al. (2025)³⁵	Thailand	Quasi-experimental study	122 cancer patients.	The 4-week program: Health education, self-care for symptom management, advance care planning, psychosocial support, and family involvement plus standard care.	The good death inventory, the Thai PPS adult Suandok, the edmonton symptom assessment scale, the Thai quality Relationship scale, the knowledge test for peaceful end-of-life care.	The results showed a significant improvement in perceived good death, quality relationships, and end-of-life care knowledge in the experimental group.
Li et al. (2023)³⁶	China	A before-after study design, a mixed methods approach to collect quantitative or qualitative data.	32 cancer patients. Male 18, female 14.	The OOIDE programme: Understanding life, understanding disease, understanding death, and understanding hospice care.	Life attitude of Profile scans (LAPS), functional assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy–Spiritual well-being scale (FACIT-sp 12), Templer’s death anxiety scale (T-DAS), the OOIDE programme satisfaction survey.	Patients' spiritual well-being scores increased significantly from 24.38 to 27.34 (P < 0.001), significant decrease in patients' death anxiety scores from 51.84 to 44.97 (P < 0.0001), a higher percentage of study participants reported thinking about their end-of-life location (75%) and discussing end-of-life matters with family members (65.6%) after the intervention. These differences were statistically significant (P < 0.05).