ArticlePEC innovation2024
An Observational Study of Dialogue about Uncertainty in Clinician-Family Counseling Conversations Following Prenatal Diagnosis of Complex Congenital Heart Disease.
Article in PEC innovation, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- From Communication to Continuity: A Structural Response to Parents' Priorities in Prenatal CHD.Pediatric cardiology · 2026Article
- Parent Perspectives on Optimal Communication About a New Prenatal Diagnosis of Complex Congenital Heart Disease: A Concept Mapping Study.Pediatric cardiology · 2026Article
- How Clinicians Prenatally Discuss Management Options and Outcomes for Congenital Heart Disease.Journal of pain and symptom management · 2026Article
- Discussion of the Fetus in Fetal Cardiology Consultations: A Qualitative Study.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Uncertainty and Communication Preferences Among Patients Undergoing Lung Transplant Evaluation: A Mixed-Methods Study.Clinical transplantation · 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
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Objective: Families who receive a prenatal diagnosis of complex congenital heart disease (cCHD) often experience severe psychological distress and identify uncertainty as a key source of that distress. This study examined clinician-family conversations during initial fetal cardiology consultations to identify the topics of uncertainty discussed. Methods: In this observational, qualitative study, initial fetal cardiology consultations were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and coded by two independent coders. A codebook was inductively and deductively developed and applied. This content analysis focused on uncertainty-related codes and associated themes. Results: During 19 consultations including five clinicians, 13 different cardiac diagnoses were discussed (seven with high mortality risk). Median consultation length was 37 min (IQR: 26-51), with only 11% of words spoken by families. On average, 51% of total words spoken focused on uncertainty in relation to cardiac diagnosis, etiology, comorbidities, prognosis, childbirth, therapeutics, and logistics. Family-initiated discussion on uncertainty largely focused on childbirth and pregnancy and postpartum logistics. Conclusions: Half of dialogue within initial fetal cardiology encounters discussed uncertainty surrounding prenatally diagnosed cCHD. Parent and clinician perspectives should be gathered on the essential content and optimal delivery of uncertainty-related topics. Innovation: This study is conceptually and methodologically innovative as one of the first to examine audio-recorded dialogue between fetal cardiology clinicians and families.
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.