ArticleBMC primary care2025
Safety netting advice for acutely ill children presenting to ambulatory care: exploring parents' opinions, ideas, and expectations through focus group interviews.
Article in BMC primary care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSafety netting advice (SNA) is an essential component of the management of acutely ill children in ambulatory care. However, healthcare professionals use a variety of SNA methods, leading to inconsistencies within and across organisations. Much research has explored the perspective on SNA of parents from the UK, but such research is lacking outside the UK context.
methodsWe conducted focus groups with Belgian parents of children 6 months to 12 years old, who were recruited through maximum variation sampling. We transcribed the interviews verbatim. Using a combination of inductive and deductive 'in vivo' coding we developed themes from the data. As per the Grounded Theory approach, we reiterated between data collection, coding, and analysis. After participant validation of provisional themes, we constructed the final thematic framework.
resultsThrough six focus groups with 30 parents, we identified five themes: (1) Relevant background information; (2) To know what to expect, what to look out for; (3) Instructions on child homecare and when to revisit a physician; (4) Physicians who consider parents' perspectives and contexts; (5) A reliable source that provides SNA only when necessary, possibly in a multimodal way.
conclusionsWe identified five themes from Belgian parents' views on SNA, aligning with prior UK research. These findings form an evidence base for developing a consensus statement on the content and form of SNA supported by both parents and experts from high-income countries.
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.