ArticleBMC palliative care2024
Building a programme theory of a specialist paediatric palliative and hospice care programme: development process and methodological reflection.
Article in BMC palliative care, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Digital storytelling as a memory-making intervention for children and families in paediatric palliative care in Ireland: an adaptation study.Frontiers in public health · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPaediatric palliative and hospice care aims to improve the quality of life of children with life-limiting and life-threatening conditions and their families. The number of these patients has risen significantly in recent years, resulting in an increased need for palliative care for this population. Although the need for paediatric palliative and hospice care is growing, meaningful outcome evaluation to demonstrate its effectiveness as a complex healthcare intervention is in its early stages. For complex interventions (programmes), theory-based evaluations have grown in prominence in recent years. They seek to understand how and why an intervention works by uncovering its underlying mechanisms by means of programme theory. To support both outcome evaluation in paediatric palliative care and a reflective practice of programme theorizing, we aimed to describe the construction of a programme theory for a specialist paediatric palliative and hospice care programme in Austria and to offer a reflective account of its development process.
methodsWe drew on a combination of theory-based evaluation frameworks to construct a programme theory consisting of an action and a change component. Through multiple iterations, incorporating different stakeholders' perspectives and drawing on different sources of knowledge and theory, we theorized how and why the programme likely achieves its intended outcomes.
resultsThe programme theory outlines the proposed chains of events, causal mechanisms and outcomes of a specialist paediatric palliative and hospice care programme for children and families in several areas corresponding to its main conceptual tenets. Through a range of activities and interventions, the programme triggers coping and adaptation mechanisms that ultimately contribute to family and child wellbeing in physical, psychological, social, and spiritual dimensions. Established trust and partnership between children/families and healthcare professionals as well as a person-centered and family-centered approach were identified as enabling factors.
conclusionsOur findings provide insights into how a specialized paediatric palliative and hospice care programme works to achieve its intended outcomes for children and families. This helps demonstrate its impact, contributing to meaningful outcome evaluation and service improvement.
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.