ReviewCurrent oncology reports2022
Approaches for Discussing Clinical Trials with Pediatric Oncology Patients and Their Families.
Review in Current oncology reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Expertise of European Clinical Trial Units in Conducting and Managing Cross-Border Pediatric Clinical Trials for Rare Diseases.Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science · 2026Article
- Moving toward precision communication in pediatric oncology clinical trials: An outline of a conceptual framework to support caregiver decision-making.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Article
- "We Were Still Left in the Back Field, Not Knowing": Pediatric Cancer Patients and Parents Describe Obstacles to Prognostic Communication.Cancer medicine · 2025Article
- Multilevel challenges to equitable inclusion of children in trials when parents use languages other than English: A qualitative report from Children's Oncology Group's Diversity and Health Disparities Committee Language Equity Working Group.Pediatric blood & cancer · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewThis manuscript aims to describe evidence-based best practices to guide clinicians in communicating with pediatric patients and their families about clinical trial enrollment. RECENT
findingsThe standard paradigm for discussing clinical trial enrollment with pediatric oncology patients and their families inconsistently enables or facilitates true informed consent. Evidence exists to suggest that adopting a shared decision-making approach may improve patient and family understanding. When navigating communication about clinical trials, clinicians should integrate the following evidence-based communication approaches: (1) extend dialogue about clinical trial enrollment across multiple conversations, allowing families space and time to process information independently; (2) use core communication skills such as avoiding jargon, checking for understanding, and responding to emotion. Clinicians should consider factors at the individual, team, organizational, community, and policy levels that may impact clinical trial communication with pediatric cancer patients and their families. This article reviews learnable skills that clinicians can master to optimize communication about clinical trial enrollment with pediatric cancer patients and their families.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35258760What 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.