Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31985331›Full record

ArticlePalliative medicine2020

Identifying key elements for paediatric advance care planning with parents, healthcare providers and stakeholders: A qualitative study.

Kerstin Hein, Kathrin Knochel, Vedrana Zaimovic, Daniel Reimann, Anna Monz, Nari Heitkamp, Gian Domenico Borasio, Monika Führer

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Palliative medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
18.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 75 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. "The American journal of hospice & palliative care · 2025
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Kerstin HeinCenter for Pediatric Palliative Care, University Children's Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians University of Munich, Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-4217-0513
Kathrin KnochelCenter for Pediatric Palliative Care, University Children's Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Vedrana ZaimovicCenter for Pediatric Palliative Care, University Children's Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Daniel ReimannCenter for Pediatric Palliative Care, University Children's Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Anna MonzCenter for Pediatric Palliative Care, University Children's Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians University of Munich, Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-0898-2569
Nari HeitkampCenter for Pediatric Palliative Care, University Children's Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Gian Domenico BorasioPalliative Care Service, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Monika FührerCenter for Pediatric Palliative Care, University Children's Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians University of Munich, Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-2677-2303
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München · DEUniversity Hospital of Lausanne · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough international guidelines recommend discussions about goals of care and treatment options for children with severe and life-limiting conditions, there are still few structured models of paediatric advance care planning.

aimThe study aimed at identifying key components of paediatric advance care planning through direct discussions with all involved parties.

designThe study had a qualitative design with a participatory approach. Participants constituted an advisory board and took part in two transdisciplinary workshops. Data were collected in discussion and dialogue groups and analysed using content analysis. SETTING/

participantsWe included bereaved parents, health care providers and stakeholders of care networks.

resultsKey elements were discussions, documentation, implementation, timing and participation of children and adolescents. Parents engage in discussions with facilitators and persons of trust to reach a decision. Documentation constitutes the focus of professionals, who endorse brief recommendations for procedures in case of emergencies, supplemented by larger advance directives. Implementation hindrances include emotional barriers of stakeholders, disagreements between parents and professionals and difficulties with emergency services. Discussion timing should take into account parental readiness. The intervention should be repeated at regular intervals, considering emerging needs and increasing awareness of families over time. Involving children and adolescents in advance care planning remains a challenge.

conclusionA paediatric advance care planning intervention should take into account potential pitfalls and barriers including issues related to timing, potential conflicts between parents and professionals, ambiguity towards written advance directives, the role of non-medical carers for paediatric advance care planning implementation, the need to involve the child and the necessity of an iterative process.

Indexed as

Advance Care PlanningPediatricsHealth PersonnelHumansParentsQualitative ResearchStakeholder ParticipationAdvance care planningadvance directivesdecision-makingpaediatricspalliative care

Identifiers

PMID31985331
PMCPMC7074656
OpenAlexW3000949676

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.