Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32130127›Full record

ReviewJournal of medical Internet research2020

Home-Based Pediatric Palliative Care and Electronic Health: Systematic Mixed Methods Review.

Heidi Holmen, Kirsti Riiser, Anette Winger

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of medical Internet research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
7.2field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 61 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Heidi HolmenOslo Metropolitan University, Oslo, Norway.ORCID 0000-0003-1314-7813
Kirsti RiiserOslo Metropolitan University, Oslo, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-0801-1121
Anette WingerOslo Metropolitan University, Oslo, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-9751-9698
OsloMet – Oslo Metropolitan University · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundChildren and families in pediatric palliative care depend on close contact with health care personnel, and electronic health (eHealth) is suggested to support care at home by facilitating their remote interactions.

objectiveThis study aimed to identify and review the use of eHealth to communicate and support home-based pediatric palliative care and appraise the methodological quality of the published research.

methodsWe conducted a convergent, systematic mixed methods review and searched Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (Medline), EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Web of Science, and Scopus for eligible papers. Studies evaluating 2-way communication technology for palliative care for children aged ≤18 years and applying quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods from 2012 to 2018 were eligible for inclusion. Quantitative and qualitative studies were equally valued during the search, screening, extraction, and analysis. Quantitative data were transformed into qualitative data and analyzed using a thematic analysis. Overall, 2 independent researchers methodologically appraised all included studies.

resultsWe identified 1277 citations. Only 7 papers were eligible for review. Evaluating eHealth interventions in pediatric palliative care poses specific methodological and ethical challenges. eHealth to facilitate remote pediatric palliative care was acknowledged both as an intrusion and as a support at home. Reluctance toward eHealth was mainly identified among professionals.

conclusionsThe strengths of the conclusions are limited by the studies' methodological challenges. Despite the limitless possibilities held by new technologies, research on eHealth in home-based pediatric palliative care is scarce. The affected children and families appeared to hold positive attitudes toward eHealth, although their views were less apparent compared with those of the professionals.

trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42018119051; https://tinyurl.com/rtsw5ky.

Indexed as

AdolescentChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHome Care ServicesHumansInfantInfant, NewbornMalePalliative CareQualitative ResearchTelemedicinechildrencommunicationeHealthfamilyhome-basedpalliative carepediatricpediatric palliative care

Identifiers

PMID32130127
PMCPMC7070344
OpenAlexW3008769438

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.