ArticleCancer medicine2025
"We Were Still Left in the Back Field, Not Knowing": Pediatric Cancer Patients and Parents Describe Obstacles to Prognostic Communication.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prognostic communication preferences of cancer patients: A hybrid concept analysis.International journal of nursing sciences · 2026Article
- Hope and Uncertainty in Prognostic Discussions.Pediatrics · 2026Article
- Evaluating the accuracy and communication quality of large language models in Ewing sarcoma: a comparative analysis of ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, DeepSeek, and Grok.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposePatient/parent perceptions of poor-quality prognostic disclosure have not been well described, and these data offer important lessons to shape clinical practice and communication skills training. In this study, we aimed to characterize patient/parent negative experiences with prognostic communication to inform future efforts to improve how clinicians disclose prognosis. PATIENTS AND
methodsSemistructured interviews were conducted with a purposeful sample of pediatric cancer patients (n = 25) and parents (n = 40) across different timepoints in the progressive illness course extending into bereavement. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and de-identified for rapid qualitative analysis, in which multiple analysts used a standardized episode summary template to extract raw data specific to patient/parent narratives about prognostic disclosure experiences. Analysts engaged independently and collaboratively as a team in reflexive memo writing to identify negative experiences with prognostic communication, followed by team discussion to generate concepts and synthesize those concepts into themes.
resultsMore than half of participants (59%) described negative experiences with prognostic disclosure, with parents highlighting distressing communication experiences more often than patients (parents: 32/40, 80% vs. patients: 6/25, 24%). Across patient/parent narratives, three main themes underpinned the perception of poor-quality prognostic communication: (1) insufficient information, (2) overwhelming or contradictory information, and (3) absence of person-centered connection.
conclusionMany patients/parents perceived prognostic disclosure to be suboptimal and identified specific features underpinning poor-quality prognostic communication. These findings will inform future collaborative research with patients, parents, and multidisciplinary clinicians to codesign an intervention that individualizes prognostication to align with patient/parent preferences for receiving information and fostering connection.
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.