Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27678531›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2016

Qualitative study of the clinician-parent interface in discussing prognosis following MRI and US imaging of preterm infants in the UK.

M E Harvey, M E Redshaw, ePrime Research Group

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Communicating prognosis with parents of critically ill infants: direct observation of clinician behaviors.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2017
    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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

M E HarveyDepartment of Perinatal Imaging and Health, Division of Imaging and Biomedical Engineering, King's College, London, UK National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK Faculty of Health, Education and Life Sciences, Birmingham City University, Birmingham, UK.
M E RedshawNational Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
ePrime Research Group
King's College London · GBUniversity of Oxford · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo explore communication and interaction between parents and clinicians following neonatal ultrasound (US) and MRI of the brain of babies born preterm.

settingThis qualitative study was undertaken as part of a larger UK study of neonatal brain imaging. 511 infants were cared for in 14 London neonatal units with MR and cerebral US imaging in a specialist centre.

participantsParents with infants born at <33 weeks gestation were randomised to receive prognostic information based on either MRI or US findings on their infants at term-corrected age.

methodsDiscussions between parents and clinicians about the MRI or US result were audio recorded. Parents were told about the findings and their baby's predicted outcome. A topic guide ensured essential aspects were covered. Recordings were fully transcribed. Discussion of the scan results, the content and style of the interaction and parental response were analysed qualitatively in 36 recordings using NVivo V.10. OUTCOMES: Key themes and subthemes were identified in the clinician-parent discussions.

resultsThe overarching theme of 'the communication interface' was identified with three key themes: 'giving information', 'managing the conversation' and 'getting it right' and further subthemes. A range of approaches were used to facilitate parental understanding and engagement. There were differences in the exchanges when information about an abnormal scan was given. The overall structure of the discussions was largely similar, though the language used varied. In all of the discussions, the clinicians talked more than the parents.

conclusionsThe discussions represent a difficult situation in which the challenge is to give and receive complex prognostic information in the context of considerable uncertainty. The study highlights the importance of being able to re-visit specific issues and any potential areas of misunderstanding, of making time to talk to parents appreciating their perspective and level of knowledge. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: EudraCT 2009-013888-19; Pre-results.

Indexed as

communicationMRIparentspretermultrasound scan

Identifiers

PMID27678531
PMCPMC5051465
OpenAlexW2527397589

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.