ArticlePaediatrics & child health2019
Shared decision making during antenatal counselling for anticipated extremely preterm birth.
Article in Paediatrics & child health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Stakeholder Perspectives on the Design of First-In-Human Trials for Artificial Amnion and Placenta Technology: A Qualitative Study.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2025Article
- Development of a checklist for evaluation of shared decision-making in consultation for extremely preterm delivery.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2025Article
- Increasing Realism and Variety of Virtual Patient Dialogues for Prenatal Counseling Education Through a Novel Application of ChatGPT: Exploratory Observational Study.JMIR medical education · 2024Observational
- Uncharted territory: a narrative review of parental involvement in decision-making about late preterm and early term delivery.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2023Review
- Exploring implicit bias in the perceived consequences of prematurity amongst health care providers in North Queensland - a constructivist grounded theory study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2021Article
- The Extremely Preterm Infant: Ethical Considerations in Life-and-Death Decision-Making.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2020Review
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo explore health care providers' (HCPs) perceptions of using shared decision making (SDM) and to identify facilitators of and barriers to its use with families facing the anticipated birth of an extremely preterm infant at 22 STUDY
designQualitative descriptive study design: we conducted interviews with 25 HCPs involved in five cases at a tertiary care centre and completed qualitative content analysis of their responses.
resultsNine facilitators and 16 barriers were identified. Facilitators included: a correct understanding of this process and how to apply it, a belief that parents should be the decision makers in these situations, and a positive outlook toward using SDM during antenatal counselling. Barriers included: HCPs' misunderstandings of how and when to apply SDM during antenatal counselling, challenges using the process for cases at the lower end of the gestational age range, fear of the negative emotions and stress parents face when making decisions, and HCPs' uncertainty about their ability to properly apply SDM.
conclusionsThis study identified facilitators and barriers to use of SDM during antenatal counselling for anticipated birth of extremely preterm infants that can be used to inform development of tailored strategies to facilitate future implementation of shared decision making in this area.
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.