SynthesisBMC pediatrics2014
When to stop? Decision-making when children's cancer treatment is no longer curative: a mixed-method systematic review.
Synthesis in BMC pediatrics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Decision-Making at End-of-Life for Children With Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Bioethical Analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Pooled it
- How are agency and autonomy understood in children's palliative and end-of-life care?: A narrative review.Palliative care and social practice · 2026Review
- Decision-making when a child with haematological malignancy relapses following haematopoietic stem cell transplantation: A meta-ethnographic review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025Review
- Parental Values During Tracheostomy Decision-Making for Their Critically Ill Child: Interviews of Parents Who Just Made the Decision.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Pediatric Oncology Hospice: A Comprehensive Review.The American journal of hospice & palliative care · 2024Review
- Article
- What can the citations of systematic reviews of ethical literature tell us about their use?-an explorative empirical analysis of 31 reviews.Systematic reviews · 2023Article
- What does the best interests principle of the convention on the rights of the child mean for paediatric healthcare?European journal of pediatrics · 2022Review
- Parent values and preferences underpinning treatment decision-making in poor-prognosis childhood cancer: a scoping review.BMC pediatrics · 2022Article
- Decision-making experiences of health professionals in withdrawing treatment for children and young people: A qualitative study.Child: care, health and development · 2022Article
- Parent values and preferences underpinning treatment decision making in poor prognosis childhood cancer: a scoping review protocol.BMJ open · 2021Article
- Ethics of a therapeutic trial: addressing limitations of an active intervention in optic nerve lymphoma.BMJ case reports · 2018Article
- Decision-making on therapeutic futility in Mexican adolescents with cancer: a qualitative study.BMC medical ethics · 2017Review
- Keeping all options open: Parents' approaches to advance care planning.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChildren with cancer, parents, and clinicians, face difficult decisions when cure is no longer possible. Little is known about decision-making processes, how agreement is reached, or perspectives of different actors. Professionals voice concerns about managing parental expectations and beliefs, which can be contrary to their own and may change over time. We conducted the first systematic review to determine what constitutes best medico-legal practice for children under 19 years as context to exploring the perspectives of actors who make judgements and decisions when cancer treatment is no longer curative.
methodsTheory-informed mixed-method thematic systematic review with theory development.
resultsEight legal/ethical guidelines and 18 studies were included. Whilst there were no unresolved dilemmas, actors had different perspectives and motives. In line with guidelines, the best interests of the individual child informed decisions, although how different actors conceptualized 'best interests' when treatment was no longer curative varied. Respect for autonomy was understood as following child/parent preferences, which varied from case to case. Doctors generally shared information so that parents alone could make an informed decision. When parents received reliable information, and personalized interest in their child, they were more likely to achieve shared trust and clearer transition to palliation. Although under-represented in research studies, young people's perspectives showed some differences to those of parents and professionals. For example, young people preferred to be informed even when prognosis was poor, and they had an altruistic desire to help others by participating in research.
conclusionThere needs to be fresh impetus to more effectively and universally implement the ethics of professionalism into daily clinical practice in order to reinforce humanitarian attitudes. Ethical guidelines and regulations attempt to bring professionals together by articulating shared values. While important, ethics training must be supported by institutions/organizations to assist doctors to maintain good professional standards. Findings will hopefully stimulate further normative and descriptive lines of research in this complex under-researched field. Future research needs to be undertaken through a more deliberative cultural lens that includes children's and multi-disciplinary team members' perspectives to more fully characterize and understand the dynamics of the decision-making process in this specific end-of life context.
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.