Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25978417›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

Barriers in referring neonatal patients to perinatal palliative care: a French multicenter survey.

Barthélémy Tosello, Lionel Dany, Pierre Bétrémieux, Pierre Le Coz, Pascal Auquier, Catherine Gire, Marie-Ange Einaudi

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 51 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Fetal outcomes and continuity in perinatal palliative care patients at a quaternary care pediatric hospital.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Outcomes following perinatal palliative care consultation: a retrospective review.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2021
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Barthélémy ToselloAix-Marseille University/EFS/CNRS, UMR 7268 ADÉS, Espace Éthique Méditerranéen, Hospital La Timone, 13005, Marseille, France; Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Marseille, Hospital Nord, Department of Neonatology, 13015, Marseille, France.
Lionel DanyAix-Marseille University, LPS EA 849, 13621, Aix-en-Provence, France; Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Marseille, Hospital La Timone, Department of Oncology, 13005, Marseille, France.
Pierre BétrémieuxUniversity Hospital Center, Hospital Sud, Department of Neonatology, Multidisciplinary Center for Prenatal Diagnosis, 35000, Rennes, France.
Pierre Le CozAix-Marseille University/EFS/CNRS, UMR 7268 ADÉS, Espace Éthique Méditerranéen, Hospital La Timone, 13005, Marseille, France.
Pascal AuquierAix-Marseille University, EA 3279, Self-Perceived Health Assessment Research Unit, 13005, Marseille, France.
Catherine GireAssistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Marseille, Hospital Nord, Department of Neonatology, 13015, Marseille, France.
Marie-Ange EinaudiAix-Marseille University/EFS/CNRS, UMR 7268 ADÉS, Espace Éthique Méditerranéen, Hospital La Timone, 13005, Marseille, France.
Aix-Marseille Université · FRCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FRHôpital Nord · FRLaboratoire de Psychologie Cognitive · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhen an incurable fetal condition is detected, some women (or couples) would rather choose to continue with the pregnancy than opt for termination of pregnancy for medical reasons, which, in France, can be performed until full term. Such situations are frequently occurring and sometimes leading to the implementation of neonatal palliative care. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the practices of perinatal care french professionals in this context; to identify the potential obstacles that might interfere with the provision of an appropriate neonatal palliative care; and, from an opposite perspective, to determine the criteria that led, in some cases, to offer this type of care for prenatally diagnosed lethal abnormality.

methodsWe used an email survey sent to 434 maternal-fetal medicine specialists (MFMs) and fetal care pediatric specialists (FCPs) at 48 multidisciplinary centers for prenatal diagnosis (MCPD).

resultsForty-two multidisciplinary centers for prenatal diagnosis (87.5%) took part. In total, 102 MFMs and 112 FCPs completed the survey, yielding response rate of 49.3%. One quarter of professionals (26.2%) estimated that over 20% of fetal pathologies presenting in MCPD could correspond to a diagnosis categorized as lethal (FCPs versus MFMs: 24% vs 17.2%, p = 0.04). The mean proportion of fetal abnormalities eligible for palliative care at birth was estimated at 19.30% (± 2.4) (FCPs versus MFMs: 23.4% vs 15.2%, p = 0.029). The degree of diagnostic certainty appears to be the most influencing factor (98.1%, n = 207) in the information provided to the pregnant woman with regard to potential neonatal palliative care. The vast majority of professionals, 92.5%, supported considering the practice of palliative care as a regular option to propose antenatally.

conclusionsOur study reveals the clear need for training perinatal professionals in perinatal palliative care and for the standardization of practices in this field.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelFemaleFranceHumansInfant, NewbornPalliative CarePerinatal CarePregnancyReferral and Consultation

Identifiers

PMID25978417
PMCPMC4433103
OpenAlexW342498198

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.