Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32949579›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of pediatrics2021

Development of a Stakeholder Driven Serious Illness Communication Program for Advance Care Planning in Children, Adolescents, and Young Adults with Serious Illness.

Danielle D DeCourcey, Lindsay Partin, Anna Revette, Rachelle Bernacki, Joanne Wolfe

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of pediatrics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
8.1field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 58 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Palliative Care and Decision for Terminal Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation in the PICU: Single-Center, Retrospective, Mixed-Methods Analysis, 2013-2022.Pediatric critical care medicine : a journal of the Society of Critical Care Medicine and the World Federation of Pediatric Intensive and Critical Care Societies · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. The Challenges of Advance Care Planning for Acute Care Registered Nurses.The Canadian journal of nursing research = Revue canadienne de recherche en sciences infirmieres · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Pediatric Advance Care Planning: A Scoping Review.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Danielle D DeCourceyDepartment of Pediatrics, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA.
Lindsay PartinDepartment of Pediatrics, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA.
Anna RevetteSurvey and Data Management Core, Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA.
Rachelle BernackiDepartment of Psychosocial Oncology and Palliative Care, Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA.
Joanne WolfeDepartment of Pediatrics, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA; Department of Psychosocial Oncology and Palliative Care, Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA.
Boston Children's Hospital · USDana-Farber Cancer Institute · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo develop a generalizable advance care planning (ACP) intervention for children, adolescents, and young adults with serious illness using a multistage, stakeholder-driven approach. STUDY

designWe first convened an expert panel of multidisciplinary health care providers (HCPs), researchers, and parents to delineate key ACP intervention elements. We then adapted an existing adult guide for use in pediatrics and conducted focus groups and interviews with HCPs, parents, and seriously ill adolescents and young adults to contextualize perspectives on ACP communication and our Pediatric Serious Illness Communication Program (PediSICP). Using thematic analysis, we identified guide adaptations, preferred content, and barriers for Pedi-SICP implementation. Expert panelists then reviewed, amended and finalized intervention components.

resultsStakeholders (34 HCPs, 9 parents, and 7 seriously ill adolescents and young adults) participated in focus groups and interviews. Stakeholders validated and refined the guide and PediSICP intervention and identified barriers to PediSICP implementation, including the need for HCP training, competing demands, uncertainty regarding timing, and documentation of ACP discussions.

conclusionsThe finalized PediSICP intervention includes a structured HCP and family ACP communication occasion supported by a 3-part communication tool and bolstered by focused HCP training. We also identified strategies to ameliorate implementation barriers. Future research will determine the feasibility of the PediSICP and whether it improves care alignment with patient and family goals.

Indexed as

CommunicationSeverity of Illness IndexStakeholder ParticipationAdolescentAdultAdvance Care PlanningChildFemaleHumansMaleYoung Adultconversations guidesdecision makingintervention developmentlife-limiting illnesslife-threatening illnessparentspediatric palliative carequalitative researchstakeholder engagement

Identifiers

PMID32949579
OpenAlexW3086187125

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.