ArticlePediatric pulmonology2021
Development and validation of a novel informational booklet for pediatric long-term ventilation decision support.
Article in Pediatric pulmonology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Care of Infants and Children with Tracheostomies: An Official American Thoracic Society Clinical Practice Guideline.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2025Guideline
- Phenomenological study on decision fatigue among surrogate decision-makers for ICU patients.Medicine · 2025Article
- Education program for caregivers in congenital central hypoventilation syndrome: Initiation and experience families.Pediatric pulmonology · 2024Article
- Parent education programs for children assisted by invasive mechanical ventilation: A scoping review.Journal of pediatric nursingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo provide accessible, uniform, comprehensive, and balanced information to families deciding whether to initiate long-term ventilation (LTV) for their child, we sought to develop and validate a novel informational resource.
methodsThe Ottawa Decision Support Framework was followed. Previous interviews with 44 lay and 15 professional stakeholders and published literature provided content for a booklet. Iterative versions were cognitive tested with six parents facing decisions and five pediatric intensivists. Ten parents facing decisions evaluated the booklet using the Preparation for Decision Making Scale and reported their decisional conflict, which was juxtaposed to the conflict of 21 parents who did not read it, using the Decisional Conflict Scale. Twelve home ventilation program directors evaluated the booklet's clinical sensibility and sensitivity, using a self-designed six-item questionnaire. Data presented using summary statistics.
resultsThe illustrated booklet (6th-grade reading level) has nine topical sections on chronic respiratory failure and invasive and noninvasive LTV, including the option to forgo LTV. Ten parents who read the booklet rated it as helping "Quite a bit" or more on all items of the Preparation for Decision Making Scale and had seemingly less decisional conflict than 21 parents who did not. Twelve directors rated it highly for clinical sensibility and sensitivity.
conclusionsThe LTV booklet was rigorously developed and favorably evaluated. It offers a resource to improve patient/family knowledge, supplement shared decision-making, and reduce decisional conflict around LTV decisions. Future studies should validate it in other settings and further study its effectiveness.
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.