ArticleArchives of disease in childhood2019
Parents' prioritised outcomes for trials investigating treatments for paediatric severe infection: a qualitative synthesis.
Article in Archives of disease in childhood, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- Trial
- Pediatric Intensive Care Core Outcomes-a modified Delphi consensus process (PIC-CO).Critical care (London, England) · 2026Review
- Protocol for a multi-country retrospective observational paediatric sepsis epidemiological study (SENTINEL International).BMJ open · 2025Article
- Developing an adaptive paediatric intensive care unit platform trial with key stakeholders: a qualitative study.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Timing of Stoma Closure in Neonates: the ToSCiN mixed-methods study.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2024Observational
- Sepsis epidemiology in AustralBMJ open · 2024Article
- Current Knowledge Regarding Long-Term Consequences of Pediatric Intensive Care: A Staff Survey in Intensive Care Units in German-Speaking Countries.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2022Article
- Priorities for paediatric critical care research: a modified Delphi study by the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Paediatric Study Group.Critical care and resuscitation : journal of the Australasian Academy of Critical Care Medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo identify parents' prioritised outcomes by combining qualitative findings from two trial feasibility studies of interventions for paediatric suspected severe infection.
designQualitative synthesis combining parent interview data from the Fluids in Shock (FiSh) and Fever feasibility studies. Parents had experience of their child being admitted to a UK emergency department or intensive care unit with a suspected infection.
participantsn=: 85 parents. FiSh study: n=41 parents, 37 mothers, 4 fathers, 7 were bereaved. Fever study: n=44 parents, 33 mothers, 11 fathers, 7 were bereaved.
resultsIn addition to survival, parents prioritised short-term outcomes including: organ and physiological functioning (eg, heart rate, breathing rate and temperature); their child looking and/or behaving more like their normal self; and length of time on treatments or mechanical support. Longer term prioritised outcomes included effects of illness on child health and development. We found that parents' prioritisation of outcomes was influenced by their experience of their child's illness, survival and the point at which they are asked about outcomes of importance in the course of their child's illness.
conclusionsFindings provide insight into parent prioritised outcomes to inform the design of future trials investigating treatments for paediatric suspected or proven severe infection as well as core outcome set development work.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.