ArticleJournal of pediatric psychology2020
Psychosocial Risk Profiles Among American and Dutch Families Affected by Pediatric Cancer.
Article in Journal of pediatric psychology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02505165 (A Clinic-Based Interdisciplinary Intervention for Parents of Children With Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 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.
A Clinic-Based Interdisciplinary Intervention for Parents of Children With Cancer
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Early trajectory of psychosocial risk in families of children and adolescents newly diagnosed with cancer.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2022Trial
- A scoping review of the experiences and well-being of siblings of children with chronic kidney disease: implications for practice and research.Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany) · 2022Article
- Families following pediatric traumatic medical events: identifying psychosocial risk profiles using latent profile analysis.European journal of psychotraumatology · 2022Article
- Implementation of family psychosocial risk assessment in pediatric cancer with the Psychosocial Assessment Tool (PAT): study protocol for a cluster-randomized comparative effectiveness trial.Implementation science : IS · 2020Article
- Screening for caregiver psychosocial risk in children with medical complexity: a cross-sectional study.BMJ paediatrics open · 2020Article
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 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveLittle is known about relations between domains of psychosocial risk among pediatric cancer populations. The Psychosocial Assessment Tool 2.0 (PAT2.0) is one internationally validated screening measure that can examine these relations. This study aimed to examine risk profiles and predictors of these patterns exhibited by American and Dutch families.
methodsCaregivers of children newly diagnosed with cancer (N = 262; nUSA=145, nNL=117) completed the PAT2.0 as part of larger studies conducted in the United States and the Netherlands. Latent profile analysis and multinomial logistic regression examined differences in demographic and medical variables across risk profiles. Domains assessed included Family Structure/Resources, Child Problems, Sibling Problems, Family Problems, Caregiver Stress Reactions, and Family Beliefs.
resultsFour groups were identified: "Low-Risk" (n = 162) defined by generally low risk across domains; "Moderate-Caregiver" (n = 55) defined by elevated Caregiver Stress Reactions domain; "Moderate-Children" (n = 25) defined by elevated Child Problems and/or Sibling Problems, and "Elevated-Risk" (n = 20) marked by generally high overall risk. Dutch families had higher odds of being in the Elevated-Risk group, compared to the Low-Risk group. Caregiver age, gender, and educational attainment predicted group membership. Families classified as Targeted or Clinical had higher odds of being in the Moderate or Elevated risk groups.
conclusionThe PAT2.0 appears to identify largely similar patterns of risk, suggesting that families experience common psychosocial difficulties in both American and Dutch societies. The two Moderate groups demonstrated specific risk sources, suggesting that evaluation of domain patterns, rather than reliance on PAT2.0 risk level, could be of clinical benefit.
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.