Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33952691›Full record

ArticlePediatrics2021

Prognostic Communication Between Oncologists and Parents of Children With Advanced Cancer.

Erica C Kaye, Melanie Stall, Cameka Woods, Srilakshmi Velrajan, Melanie Gattas, Monica Lemmon, Justin N Baker, Jennifer W Mack

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pediatrics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Parent and oncologist perspectives on prognostic disclosure in advanced childhood cancer: communication pearls and pitfalls.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Erica C KayeSt. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, Tennessee; erica.kaye@stjude.org.
Melanie StallThe University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas.
Cameka WoodsSt. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, Tennessee.
Srilakshmi VelrajanSchool of Public Health, The University of Memphis, Memphis, Tennessee.
Melanie GattasSt. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, Tennessee.
Monica LemmonDepartment of Pediatrics, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina.
Justin N BakerSt. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, Tennessee.
Jennifer W MackDana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts; and.

Funding

Decision Making for Infants with Neurologic ConditionsK23NS116453 · NINDS · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI LEMMON, MONICA · 2020 to 2024
$942k
NINDS NIH HHS K23 NS116453
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectivesParents of children with cancer perceive deficits in quality of prognostic communication. How oncologists disclose information about disease progression and incurability and how prognostic communication impacts parental understanding of prognosis are poorly understood. In this study, we aimed to (1) characterize communication strategies used by pediatric oncologists to share prognostic information across a child's advancing illness course and (2) explore relationships between different communication approaches and concordance of oncologist-parent prognostic understanding.

methodsIn this prospective, longitudinal, mixed-methods study, serial disease reevaluation conversations were audio recorded across an advancing illness course for children with cancer and their families. Surveys and interviews also were conducted with oncologists and caregivers at specific time points targeting disease progression.

resultsSeventeen children experienced advancing illness on study, resulting in 141 recordings (40 hours). Fewer than 4% of recorded dialogue constituted prognostic communication, with most codes (77%) occurring during discussions about frank disease progression. Most recordings at study entry contained little or no prognosis communication dialogue, and oncologists rated curability lower than parents across all dyads. Parent-oncologist discordance typically was preceded by conversations without incurability statements; ultimately, concordance was achieved in most cases after the oncologist made direct statements about incurability. Content analysis revealed 3 distinct patterns (absent, deferred, and seed planting) describing the provision of prognostic communication across an advancing pediatric cancer course.

conclusionsWhen oncologists provided direct statements about incurability, prognostic understanding appeared to improve. Further research is needed to determine optimal timing for prognostic disclosure in alignment with patient and family preferences.

Indexed as

CommunicationMedical OncologyNeoplasmsParentsPediatricsProfessional-Family RelationsTruth DisclosureAdolescentChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansInfantLongitudinal StudiesMaleNeoplasm Staging

Identifiers

PMID33952691
PMCPMC8503785

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.