ArticleThe South African journal of communication disorders = Die Suid-Afrikaanse tydskrif vir Kommunikasieafwykings2024
Who really decides? Feeding decisions 'made' by caregivers of children with cerebral palsy.
Article in The South African journal of communication disorders = Die Suid-Afrikaanse tydskrif vir Kommunikasieafwykings, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Right to Food for Children With Cerebral Palsy in South Africa: Examining Nutritional Access and Structural Barriers.Child: care, health and development · 2026Article
- Current trends and identified gaps in dysphagia research in Africa: A scoping review.The South African journal of communication disorders = Die Suid-Afrikaanse tydskrif vir Kommunikasieafwykings · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere are no definitive guidelines for clinical decisions for children with cerebral palsy (CP) requiring enteral feeds. Traditionally, medical doctors made enteral feeding decisions, while patients were essentially treated passively within a paternalistic 'doctor knows best' approach. Although a more collaborative approach to decision-making has been promoted globally as the favoured model among healthcare professionals, little is known about how these decisions are currently made practically.
objectivesThis study aimed to identify the significant individuals, factors and views involved in the enteral feeding decision-making process for caregivers of children with CP within the South African public healthcare sector.
methodA single-case research design was used in this qualitative explorative study. Data were collected using semi-structured interviews and analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.
resultsFour primary individuals were identified by the caregivers in the decision-making process: doctors, speech therapists, caregivers' families and God. Four factors were identified as extrinsically motivating: (1) physiological factors, (2) nutritional factors, (3) financial factors and (4) environmental factors. Two views were identified as intrinsically motivating: personal beliefs regarding enteral feeding tubes, and feelings of fear and isolation.
conclusionEnteral feeding decision-making within the South African public healthcare sector is currently still dominated by a paternalistic approach, endorsed by a lack of caregiver knowledge, distinct patient-healthcare provider power imbalances and prescriptive multidisciplinary healthcare dialogues.Contribution: This study has implications for clinical practice, curriculum development at higher education training facilities, and institutional policy changes and development, thereby contributing to the current knowledge and clinical gap(s) in the area.
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.