ArticlePloS one2012
Attitudes toward infection prophylaxis in pediatric oncology: a qualitative approach.
Article in PloS one, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Numbers and narratives: how qualitative methods can strengthen the science of paediatric antimicrobial stewardship.JAC-antimicrobial resistance · 2022Review
- Opening the 'Black Box': An Overview of Methods to Investigate the Decision-Making Process in Choice-Based Surveys.The patient · 2020Review
- Medication adherence decision-making among adolescents and young adults with cancer.European journal of oncology nursing : the official journal of European Oncology Nursing Society · 2016Article
- Identification of the Key Fields and Their Key Technical Points of Oncology by Patent Analysis.PloS one · 2015Article
- Antibiotic prophylaxis in children with cancer or who have undergone hematopoietic cell transplantation.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe risks and benefits of infection prophylaxis are uncertain in children with cancer and thus, preferences should be considered in decision making. The purpose of this report was to describe the attitudes of parents, children and healthcare professionals to infection prophylaxis in pediatric oncology.
methodsTHE STUDY WAS COMPLETED IN THREE PHASES: 1) An initial qualitative pilot to identify the main attributes influencing the decision to use infection prophylaxis, which were then incorporated into a discrete choice experiment; 2) A think aloud during the discrete choice experiment in which preferences for infection prophylaxis were elicited quantitatively; and 3) In-depth follow up interviews. Interviews were recorded verbatim and analyzed using an iterative, thematic analysis. Final themes were selected using a consensus approach.
resultsA total of 35 parents, 22 children and 28 healthcare professionals participated. All three groups suggested that the most important factor influencing their decision making was the effect of prophylaxis on reducing the chance of death. Themes of importance to the three groups included antimicrobial resistance, side effects of medications, the financial impact of outpatient prophylaxis and the route and schedule of administration.
conclusionEffect of prophylaxis on risk of death was a key factor in decision making. Other identified factors were antimicrobial resistance, side effects of medication, financial impact and administration details. Better understanding of factors driving decision making for infection prophylaxis will help facilitate future implementation of prophylactic regiments.
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.