Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40259305›Full record

ArticleHealth and quality of life outcomes2025

A novel child-centred core palliative care outcome measure for use in clinical practice and research: findings from a multinational validation study.

Eve Namisango, Fliss E M Murtagh, Katherine Bristowe, Julia Downing, Richard A Powell, Mackuline Atieno, Margaret Sandham, Zipporah Ali, Michelle Meiring, Faith N Mwangi-Powell and 4 more

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Health and quality of life outcomes, 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. A Mixed-Methods Exploration of the Quality of Care and Care Needs for Asian Children and Young Adults With Serious Long-Term Conditions.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Observational
  2. Review
  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

14 authors.

Eve NamisangoAfrican Palliative Care Association, Plot 850 Dr Gibbons Road, Kampala, Uganda. eve.namisango@africanpalliativecare.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5032-4714
Fliss E M MurtaghKing's College London, Florence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing, Midwifery and Palliative Care, Cicely Saunders Institute, London, UK.
Katherine BristoweKing's College London, Florence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing, Midwifery and Palliative Care, Cicely Saunders Institute, London, UK.
Julia DowningAfrican Palliative Care Association, Plot 850 Dr Gibbons Road, Kampala, Uganda.
Richard A PowellEthnicity and Health Unit, Department of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College London, London, England.
Mackuline AtienoAfrican Palliative Care Association, Plot 850 Dr Gibbons Road, Kampala, Uganda.
Margaret SandhamSchool of Psychology, Massey University, Albany, Auckland, New Zealand.
Zipporah AliKenya Hospices and Palliative Care Association, Nairobi, Kenya.
Michelle MeiringPAEDPAL Paediatric Palliative Care, South Africa Formerly at Red Cross War Children's Memorial Hospital, Cape Town, South Africa.
Faith N Mwangi-PowellMWAPO Health Development Group, Nairobi, Kenya.
Melanie AbbasHealth Services and Population Research Department, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, London, UK.
Lorna K FraserKing's College London, Florence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing, Midwifery and Palliative Care, Cicely Saunders Institute, London, UK.
Irene J HigginsonKing's College London, Florence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing, Midwifery and Palliative Care, Cicely Saunders Institute, London, UK.
Richard HardingKing's College London, Florence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing, Midwifery and Palliative Care, Cicely Saunders Institute, London, UK.

Funding

AIDSTAR-One -001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOutcome measurement is pivotal to person-centred assessment, quality improvement and research. Children and young people with life-limiting and -threatening illness have high needs and service use, yet there is a lack of evidence for interventions and care models. Efforts to strengthen paediatric palliative care (PPC) services has been hampered by the lack of an appropriate outcome measure.

objectiveTo determine the validity, reliability, measurement invariance, responsiveness, acceptability, and interpretability properties of the novel Children's Palliative care Outcome Scale (C-POS).

methodsWe recruited children (0-17 years) with life-limiting/life threatening conditions and their families in Kenya, Uganda and South Africa. Using C-POS repeated measurement using over four timepoints. We assessed: 1) construct validity (structural properties, discriminant validity, known groups validity, measurement invariance, differential item functioning by country), 2) reliability (internal consistency and test re-test), 3) responsiveness, 4) acceptability (time to complete) and 5) interpretability.

resultsWe recruited a cohort of 434 children (response rate 94%). Of these, 302 participated in the repeated measures component and 279 (92%) completed four datapoints. We found evidence for face and content validity as the C-POS items mapped on to themes developed from qualitative interviews, including: pain and other symptoms, pyscho-social well-being, and family wellbeing that matter to children and their families. We confirmed: 1) the two-factor structure (child and family subscales). We also confirmed discriminant and known groups validity, as well as construct equivalence for the child self-report and proxy versions. Controlling for age, we found no differential item functioning by country setting. 2)The sub-scale internal consistency was moderate, given the multi-dimensional nature of the C-POS self and proxy report versions omega scores (0.67 and 0.73, respectively). The test characteristic curve information confirmed the moderate internal subscale consistency scores between 0.3- 0.9 for the proxy version and 0.3-0.5 for the self-report version. Test-retest reliability was acceptable for all items, with weighted kappa range for scores: self-report (0.43-0.57) and proxy version (0.35-0.64) and family items (0.51-0.71). 3)Responsiveness was demonstrated, except for the feeding item. 4)Median completion time at the last visit was 10 min for both versions with minimal missing data. 5)The minimum important difference was 3 for the self and proxy report versions on a scale of 0-30 and 4 for the child and family scale on a scale of 0-55. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The C-POS has good psychometric properties. To further improve the measure, we identified items for potential removal, conceptual gaps that should be addressed and domains for which developmental age-appropriate items are needed. C-POS has potential to evaluate and improve person-centred children's palliative care in research and routine clinical practice.

Indexed as

Outcome Assessment, Health CarePalliative CareAdolescentChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansInfantInfant, NewbornKenyaMalePatient-Centered CarePsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSouth AfricaSurveys and QuestionnairesAfricaChildrenOutcome measurementPaediatric palliative care

Identifiers

PMID40259305
PMCPMC12010634

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.