Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30666797›Full record

ArticlePediatric blood & cancer2019

Content review of pediatric ethics consultations at a cancer center.

Meredith C Winter, Danielle Novetsky Friedman, Mary S McCabe, Louis P Voigt

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pediatric blood & cancer, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
5.1field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Specific Trends in Pediatric Ethical Decision-Making: An 18-Year Review of Ethics Consultation Cases in a Pediatric Hospital.HEC forum : an interdisciplinary journal on hospitals' ethical and legal issues · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Ethics consultations in neuro-oncology.Neuro-oncology practice · 2021
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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 1 country.

Meredith C WinterSupportive Care Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York City, New York.ORCID 0000-0001-5905-5223
Danielle Novetsky FriedmanDepartment of Pediatrics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York City, New York.ORCID 0000-0003-4668-9176
Mary S McCabeNational Coalition for Cancer Survivorship, Silver Spring, Maryland.
Louis P VoigtEthics Committee, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York City, New York.
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center · USNational Coalition for Cancer Survivorship · US

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Hongbiao Carl Lekaye · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748NIH HHS P30 CA008748
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND/

objectivesEthical challenges in pediatric oncology arise at every stage of illness. However, there are sparse data on the content of and reason for ethics consultations in the field. We sought to evaluate the content and characteristics of ethics consultations in pediatric patients at a cancer center. DESIGN/

methodsWe retrospectively identified ethics consultations performed for patients diagnosed with cancer at ≤21 years of age who were treated in the Department of Pediatrics from 2007 to 2017. Using an established coding schema, two independent reviewers analyzed the content of ethics consultation notes and identified core ethical issues and relevant contextual issues. Demographic, clinical, and consultation-specific data were also collected.

resultsThirty-five consultations were performed for 32 unique patients. The most commonly identified ethical issues were obligation to provide nonbeneficial treatment (29%) and resuscitation preferences (26%). Communication conflicts were the most commonly identified contextual issue (40%). There were two themes that emerged repeatedly but were not a part of the original coding schema-four consultations (11%) that involved physicians questioning their obligation to provide potentially toxic treatment in the setting of poor patient/parent compliance, and two consultations (6%) related to complex risk-benefit analysis in the setting of an invasive procedure with uncertain benefit.

conclusionsPediatric ethics consultations are infrequent at this specialty cancer hospital. Ethical issues focused on treatment and end-of-life care and included a diversity of communication conflicts.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAttitude of Health PersonnelCancer Care FacilitiesChildChild, PreschoolCommunicationCritical CareDecision MakingEthics CommitteesEthics ConsultationFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansInfantInfant, Newbornethicsethics consultationsoncologypediatrics

Identifiers

PMID30666797
PMCPMC6777958
OpenAlexW2913427200

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.