Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33848191›Full record

ArticleJCO oncology practice2021

Assume It Will Break: Parental Perspectives on Negative Communication Experiences in Pediatric Oncology.

Bryan A Sisk, Jessica A Zavadil, Lindsay J Blazin, Justin N Baker, Jennifer W Mack, James M DuBois

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JCO oncology practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.0field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Journal of psychosocial oncology · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Understanding theChildren (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Bryan A SiskDepartment of Pediatrics, Division of Hematology/Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, MO.ORCID 0000-0002-2456-2476
Jessica A ZavadilDepartment of Pediatrics, St Louis Children's Hospital, St Louis, MO.
Lindsay J BlazinDepartment of Oncology, St Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, TN.ORCID 0000-0002-9651-0616
Justin N BakerDepartment of Oncology, St Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, TN.
Jennifer W MackPediatric Oncology and Division of Population Sciences, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA.ORCID 0000-0001-5791-4178
James M DuBoisDepartment of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, MO.ORCID 0000-0002-3712-7051
St. Jude Children's Research Hospital · USWashington University in St. Louis · USBoston Children's Hospital · USSt. Louis Children's Hospital · US

Funding

WU INSTITUTE OF CLINICAL AND TRANSLATIONAL SCIENCESUL1TR002345 · NCATS · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI William G. Powderly · 2017 to 2026
$97.8M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002345
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeCommunication breakdowns in pediatric oncology can have negative consequences for patients and families. A detailed analysis of these negative encounters will support clinicians in anticipating and responding to communication breakdowns.

methodsSemistructured interviews with 80 parents of children with cancer across three academic medical centers during treatment, survivorship, or bereavement. We analyzed transcripts using semantic content analysis.

resultsNearly all parents identified negative communication experiences (n = 76). We identified four categories of contributors to negative experiences: individual (n = 68), team (n = 26), organization (n = 46), and greater health care system (n = 8). These experiences involved a variety of health care professionals across multiple specialties. Parents reported 12 personal consequences of communication breakdowns: emotional distress (n = 65), insufficient understanding (n = 48), decreased trust or confidence (n = 37), inconvenience (n = 36), medical harm (n = 23), decreased self-confidence (n = 17), decreased emotional support (n = 13), decreased engagement (n = 9), false hope (n = 9), decreased hope (n = 7), financial insult (n = 7), and decreased access to resources (n = 3). We identified five categories of supportive responses from clinicians: exploring (n = 8), acknowledging (n = 17), informing (n = 27), adapting (n = 27), and advocating (n = 18). Parents often increased their own advocacy on behalf of their child (n = 47). Parents also identified the need for parental engagement in finding solutions (n = 12). Finally, one parent suggested that clinicians should assume that communication will fail and develop contingency plans in advance.

conclusionCommunication breakdowns in pediatric oncology negatively affect parents and children. Clinicians should plan for communication breakdowns and respond by exploring, acknowledging, informing, adapting, advocating, and engaging parents in finding solutions.

Indexed as

BereavementNeoplasmsChildCommunicationHumansMedical OncologyParents

Identifiers

PMID33848191
PMCPMC8257978
OpenAlexW3154395915

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.