Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40256964›Full record

ArticleJournal of evaluation in clinical practice2025

Paediatric Palliative Care in Clinical Practice: Ethical Issues in Advance Care Planning and End-of-Life Decisions.

Anamarija Meglič, Ajda Lisec

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of evaluation in clinical practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
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

2 authors.

Anamarija MegličPediatric Palliative Care Team, University Children's Hospital, University Medical Center Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.ORCID 0000-0002-1273-690X
Ajda LisecClinical Department of Anesthesiology and Surgical Intensive Care, University Medical Center Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.ORCID 0000-0001-5463-3901

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

rationaleThis study examines ethical challenges faced by a paediatric palliative care (PPC) team when making end-of-life (EOL) decisions for children with life-limiting conditions.

aimTo assess the team's attitudes towards ethical issues and propose innovative solutions.

methodsThe data was collected in 2022 at the University Children's Hospital Ljubljana. A researcher-made questionnaire was developed based on team experience. Ten PPC team members participated anonymously, evaluating ethical concerns in communication, decision-making, and patient characteristics. Mann-Whitney U test was used to analyze the data.

resultsEthical issues emerge when coordinating treatment opinions becomes challenging, resulting in excluding a child from PPC. Situations involving communication, differing healthcare opinions, and patient characteristics were seen as ethical issues, highlighting the importance of communication and shared decision-making.

conclusionsEthical complexities in paediatric EOL care require adept communication and interdisciplinary teamwork. Poor communication may be associated with excluding children from PPC. Innovative strategies and ongoing training are vital to address these challenges effectively, ensuring optimal care for children and their families.

Indexed as

Advance Care PlanningDecision MakingPalliative CarePediatricsTerminal CareAttitude of Health PersonnelChildCommunicationDecision Making, SharedFemaleHumansMalePatient Care TeamSurveys and Questionnairesadvance care planningchildrenend‐of‐life decisionethicspalliative care

Identifiers

PMID40256964
PMCPMC12010454

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.