Observational studyEuropean journal of pediatrics2018
Provided information and parents' comprehension at the time of admission of their child in pediatric intensive care unit.
Observational study in European journal of pediatrics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Implementation of a partnership involving parents in the care of critically ill children: an integrative review.Acute and critical care · 2025Article
- Health Literacy in the Inpatient Setting: Implications for Patient Care and Patient Safety.Pediatric clinics of North America · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study evaluated the first interaction (FI) between parents and health care providers at the time of admission of a child in pediatric intensive care unit (PICU), and explored the extent to which parents understood the medical information. This prospective study took place in three French university-affiliated PICUs. Forty-two parents of 30 children were interviewed. The physician and nurse who took care of the child completed a questionnaire. We evaluated parents' comprehension (excellent, fair, or poor) by comparing parents' and physicians' responses to six items: diagnosis, affected organ, reason for hospitalization, prognosis, treatments, and further investigations. Parent-physician FI occurred within 24 h of child's admission. Two thirds of the parents were dissatisfied to wait before receiving information. Most of the parents had an excellent comprehension of the affected organ (n = 25/28, 89.3%) and prognosis (n = 26/30, 86.7%). Two thirds of the parents understood the reason for hospitalization (n = 18/28, 64.3%) and diagnosis (n = 19/30, 63.3%). Less than half the parents understood child's treatments (n = 10/30, 33.3%) and further investigations (n = 8/21, 38.1%). When a nurse delivered information on treatment, parental comprehension improved (p = 0.053).
conclusionParents complained of their wait time before receiving information. Most of them had an excellent comprehension. An improved communication between nurses and physicians is mandatory, and the active participation of nurses to give information to the parents should be encouraged. What is known: • In pediatric intensive care unit, health care providers deliver information to parents on their child's condition, which fosters the trust between them to build a partnership. • Various guidelines exist to help health care providers communicate with parents in PICU, but never mention the specific time of admission. What is new: • Even though parents could wait before entering the unit, they all received information on their child's condition within 24 hours after admission. • Parents understood the information well, and nurses improved the parental comprehension of the treatments by reformulating.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29270825What 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.