Table 4.

Evidence from mixed-method studies.

Author, Year, Country *	Aim (A), Design (D)	Population (Age in Years), n	Outcome Parameters		Risk of Bias Total Score (6)	Quality of Reporting Total Score (32)
			Quantitative	Qualitative
Kline, 2012, USA [46]	A: To assess family satisfaction and preferences with their palliative care program and its DMT tool (Decision-Making Tool) D: Supportive care survey and open-ended questions interview study	Guardians of high-risk hemato-oncology pediatric patients (mean of 9.7), n = 20 (quantitative outcomes) and n = 6 (qualitative outcomes)	Understanding treatment options Factors, people and services guiding treatment decisions Effectiveness of the decision-making conference, the palliative care program and DMT	Open-ended questions on the palliative care program and DMT; questions NS	4	6
Lyon, 2019, USA [47]	A: To assess the feasibility and acceptability of FACE-Rare (FAmily-CEntered pediatric Advance Care Planning-Rare) D: Pre–post-test questionnaire study	Pediatric patients with rare diseases (≥1–≤21) and their legal guardians or family caregivers (all mothers), dyads n = 6	FACE-Rare Caregiver appraisal Family satisfaction based on positive and negative experienced emotions Families’ quality of communication with providers	Questions NS	5	8.5
Noyes, 2013, UK [50]	A: To evaluate ‘My Choices’ and enhance future care planning D: Pre–post-test questionnaire (quantitative) and semi-structured interview (qualitative) study	Children and young people (0–≥16) with complex health and palliative care needs, as well as their parents and health-care providers, children n = 11 parents n = 12, bereaved parents n = 3, professionals n = 13 (qualitative outcomes), professionals (pre-study) n = 27, and professionals (post-study) n = 20 (quantitative outcomes)	Professionals evaluating My Choices on preferred: Location of care Diverse aspects in palliative care	Views of parents, children, and professionals on the My Choices booklets; questions/themes NS	2	12
Wiener, 2008, USA [49]	A: To assess the acceptability of Five Wishes, helpfulness, and defining important EOL concerns D: Descriptive study data and closed- and open-response interviews	Adolescents and young adults with HIV-1 or metastatic/recurrent cancer (16–28), n = 20	Five Wishes: Age appropriateness for someone their age Helpful for someone of the participant’s age Helpful or stressful to the participant	Adjustments to the Five Wishes document	4	11
Wiener, 2012, USA [48]	A: To assess and compare the usefulness, helpfulness, and stressfulness of the MTMWMV (My Thoughts, My Wishes, My Voice) with the Five Wishes D: Descriptive study data and closed- and open-response interviews	AYAs with metastatic or recurrent cancer or HIV infection (16–28), n = 52	Evaluating both tools regarding: Age appropriateness for someone their age Helpful for someone of the participant’s age Helpful or stressful to the participant Perceived legality of the document	Adjustments to the MTMWMV document	4	4.5

AYAs: adolescents and young adults; EOL: end of life, HIV: human immunodeficiency virus; NS: not specified; * Country where study was conducted.