Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39401847›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical ethics2025

Hope pluralism in antenatal palliative care.

Sophie Bertaud, Mehrunisha Suleman, Dominic Wilkinson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical ethics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Perinatal palliative care - how to approach antenatal counselling.Archives of disease in childhood. Education and practice edition · 2026
    Article
  2. Therapeutic Misconception as a Problem of Nonmaleficence by Way of False Hope.Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

3 authors.

Sophie BertaudOxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK sophie.bertaud@ethox.ox.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9039-5207
Mehrunisha SulemanEthox Centre, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8819-0659
Dominic WilkinsonOxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3958-8633

Funding

Wellcome Trust 203132Wellcome Trust 224744
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

When parents face the distressing news during pregnancy that their baby is affected by a serious medical condition that will likely lead to the baby's death before or soon after birth, they experience a range of complex emotions. Perhaps paradoxically, one common response is that of hope. Navigating such hope in antenatal interactions with parents can be difficult for healthcare professionals. That can stem from a desire to accurately communicate prognostic information and a fear of conveying 'false hope' to families. In this paper, we examine the role that hope plays when parents and healthcare professionals are grappling with a confirmed antenatal diagnosis of a life-limiting condition. We assess what it means to hope in this context and consider the different types of hopes held by both parents and healthcare professionals as well as why hopeful thinking might be helpful and not harmful. We propose 'hope pluralism' as a concept that might allow healthcare professionals to accommodate a multitude of parental and professional hopes, even where these conflict. Finally, we offer some practical suggestions for how professionals should evaluate and respond to hope in situations that might (from the outside) appear hopeless.

Indexed as

HopePalliative CareParentsPrenatal CareProfessional-Family RelationsFemaleHumansPregnancyPrenatal DiagnosisFetusObstetricsPalliative CarePediatricsPrenatal Diagnosis

Identifiers

PMID39401847
PMCPMC12322395

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.