ArticleJournal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE2012
Negotiating decisions during informed consent for pediatric Phase I oncology trials.
Article in Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advancing the field of communication research in pediatric oncology: A systematic review of the literature analyzing medical dialogue.Pediatric blood & cancer · 2018Pooled it
- Parents' Insights into Pediatric Oncology Phase I Clinical Trials: Experiences from Their Child's Participation.Seminars in oncology nursing · 2021Review
- Parental Experiences of Child Participation in a Phase I Pediatric Oncology Clinical Trial: "We Don't Have Time to Waste".Qualitative health research · 2019Article
- Well-Being of Child and Family Participants in Phase 1 Pediatric Oncology Clinical Trials.Oncology nursing forum · 2018Review
- Communication in pediatric oncology: State of the field and research agenda.Pediatric blood & cancer · 2018Review
- Communication about the risks and benefits of phase I pediatric oncology trials.Contemporary clinical trials · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
During informed consent conferences (ICCs) for Phase I trials, oncologists must present complex information while addressing concerns. Research on communication that evolves during ICCs remains largely unexplored. We examined communication during ICCs for pediatric Phase I cancer trials using a stratified random sample from six pediatric cancer centers. A grounded theory approach identified key communication steps and factors influencing the negotiation of decisions for trial participation. Analysis suggests that during ICCs, families, patients, and clinicians exercise choice and control by negotiating micro-decisions in two broad domains: drug logic and logistics, and administration/scheduling. Micro-decisions unfold in a four-step communication process: (1) introduction of an issue; (2) response; (3) negotiation of the issue; and (4) resolution and decision. Negotiation over smaller micro-decisions is prominent in ICCs and merits further study.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.