Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36053589›Full record

ArticleBMJ paediatrics open2022

Development of the My Positive Health dialogue tool for children: a qualitative study on children's views of health.

Stacey de Jong-Witjes, Marijke C Kars, Marja van Vliet, Machteld Huber, Sabine E I van der Laan, Eva N Gelens, Emma E Berkelbach van der Sprenkel, Sanne L Nijhof, Maretha V de Jonge, Hester Rippen and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ paediatrics open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Next steps in the development of a sibling adjustment scale: reply to Supianto.International journal of developmental disabilities · 2025
    Article
  9. Designing a Positive Health Dialogue Tool for Adolescents and Young Adults: A Mixed Methods Study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024
    Article
  10. Review
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

11 authors.

Stacey de Jong-WitjesPaediatrics, Wilhelmina Children's Hospital University Medical Centre, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-4400-7576
Marijke C KarsJulius Centre for Health Sciences and Primary Care, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Marja van VlietInstitute for Positive Health Foundation, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Machteld HuberInstitute for Positive Health Foundation, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Sabine E I van der LaanPaediatrics, Wilhelmina Children's Hospital University Medical Centre, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Eva N GelensPaediatrics, Wilhelmina Children's Hospital University Medical Centre, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Emma E Berkelbach van der SprenkelPaediatrics, Wilhelmina Children's Hospital University Medical Centre, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Sanne L NijhofPaediatrics, Wilhelmina Children's Hospital University Medical Centre, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-1538-5014
Maretha V de JongeClinical Neurodevelopmental Sciences, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Hester RippenStichting Kind En Ziekenhuis, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Elise M van de PuttePaediatrics, Wilhelmina Children's Hospital University Medical Centre, Utrecht, The Netherlands E.vandePutte@umcutrecht.nl.ORCID 0000-0001-7232-3827

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundChildren's views of health were explored in order to develop a health dialogue tool for children.

methodsA qualitative research design was used as part of a codesign process. Based on semi-structured interviews with both healthy children and children with a chronic condition (aged 8-18). Two approaches were applied. The first was an open exploration of children's views on health, which was then thematically analysed. Subsequently, a framework was used, based on the six-dimensional My Positive Health (MPH) dialogue tool for adults, to guide the second part of the interviews, focusing on reviewing the children's view on health within the context of the framework. For the final draft of the dialogue tool, a framework analysis was conducted and then validated by members of the 'children's council' of the Wilhelmina Children's Hospital.

resultsWe interviewed 65 children, 45 of whom had a chronic condition and 20 were healthy. The children described a broad concept of health with the central themes of 'feeling good about yourself' and 'being able to participate'. Based on the subsequent framework analysis, the wording of two of the six dimensions of the MPH dialogue tool was adjusted and the related aspects were adapted for better alignment with the children's concept of health. After these modifications, the tool fully matched the children's concept of health.

conclusionThe MPH dialogue tool for children was developed for children with and without a chronic condition, to help them open up about what they consider important for their health and well-being, and to improve directorship over decisions and actions that would affect their health. The MPH dialogue tool aims to support healthcare professionals in providing the type of care and treatment that is in line with the needs of their young patients/clients.

Indexed as

EmotionsChronic DiseaseHumansQualitative ResearchQualitative research

Identifiers

PMID36053589
PMCPMC9014061

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.