ArticleThe Journal of pediatrics2021
Information Order for Periviable Counseling: Does It Make a Difference?
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 2 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ethical considerations regarding the treatment of extremely preterm infants at the limit of viability: a comprehensive review.European journal of pediatrics · 2025Review
- Opportunities and Challenges of Prognostic Models for Extremely Preterm Infants.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo examine whether the order of presenting survival vs disability information, with or without the description of infant neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) experiences would influence treatment choice during hypothetical periviable birth counseling. STUDY
designAn internet sample of childbearing-aged women (n = 839) viewed a pictograph displaying the chances of survival and a pictograph on the chances of disability for a baby resuscitated during the periviable period. The sample was randomized to the order of pictographs and level of description of infant NICU experiences. Participants selected between intensive care or comfort care and reported their personal values.
resultsThe order of the information influenced treatment choices (P = .02); participants were more likely to choose intensive care if they saw the survival pictograph first (70%) than the disability pictograph first (62%). Level of description of premature infant NICU experiences did not influence treatment choice (P = .92). Participants who valued sanctity of life, autonomy in making decisions, who were more religious, and had adequate health literacy were more likely to choose intensive care. Such participant characteristics had greater explanatory power than the experimental manipulations.
conclusionsSubtle differences in how information is presented may influence critical decisions. However, even among women with the same values, diversity in treatment choice remains.
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.