Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25389347›Full record

ArticlePalliative medicine2015

Pediatric advance care planning from the perspective of health care professionals: a qualitative interview study.

Julia D Lotz, Ralf J Jox, Gian Domenico Borasio, Monika Führer

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Palliative medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
10.1field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

49 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 130 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Pediatric Advance Care Planning: A Scoping Review.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Julia D LotzCoordination Center for Pediatric Palliative Care, University Children's Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians University, Munich, Germany Julia.Lotz@med.uni-muenchen.de.
Ralf J JoxInstitute of Ethics, History and Theory of Medicine, Ludwig-Maximilians University, Munich, Germany.
Gian Domenico BorasioService de Soins Palliatifs, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Monika FührerCoordination Center for Pediatric Palliative Care, University Children's Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians University, Munich, Germany.
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München · DEUniversity Hospital of Lausanne · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPediatric advance care planning differs from the adult setting in several aspects, including patients' diagnoses, minor age, and questionable capacity to consent. So far, research has largely neglected the professionals' perspective.

aimWe aimed to investigate the attitudes and needs of health care professionals with regard to pediatric advance care planning.

designThis is a qualitative interview study with experts in pediatric end-of-life care. A qualitative content analysis was performed. SETTING/

participantsWe conducted 17 semi-structured interviews with health care professionals caring for severely ill children/adolescents, from different professions, care settings, and institutions.

resultsPerceived problems with pediatric advance care planning relate to professionals' discomfort and uncertainty regarding end-of-life decisions and advance directives. Conflicts may arise between physicians and non-medical care providers because both avoid taking responsibility for treatment limitations according to a minor's advance directive. Nevertheless, pediatric advance care planning is perceived as helpful by providing an action plan for everyone and ensuring that patient/parent wishes are respected. Important requirements for pediatric advance care planning were identified as follows: repeated discussions and shared decision-making with the family, a qualified facilitator who ensures continuity throughout the whole process, multi-professional conferences, as well as professional education on advance care planning.

conclusionDespite a perceived need for pediatric advance care planning, several barriers to its implementation were identified. The results remain to be verified in a larger cohort of health care professionals. Future research should focus on developing and testing strategies for overcoming the existing barriers.

Indexed as

Advance Care PlanningAttitude of Health PersonnelAdultAdvance DirectivesDecision MakingFemaleHealth Services Needs and DemandHumansMaleMiddle AgedPediatricsProfessional-Family RelationsQualitative ResearchSurveys and QuestionnairesTerminal CareAdvance care planningadvance directivespediatricsresuscitation ordersshared decision-makingterminal care

Identifiers

PMID25389347
PMCPMC4359209
OpenAlexW2130995986

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.