ReviewAsia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing2025
Legacy-making interventions in pediatric palliative care: A mixed methods systematic review.
Review in Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Legacy-Oriented Interventions for Supporting Family Bereavement and Psychosocial Adaptation in Pediatric Palliative Care: A Systematic Review.The American journal of hospice & palliative care · 2026Pooled it
- The Palliation of Pediatric Kidney Transplantation.Pediatric transplantation · 2026Review
- Feasibility, acceptability and potential efficacy of the pediatric family-based dignity therapy for children with advanced cancer: A pilot study.Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing · 2025Article
- Digital storytelling as a memory-making intervention for children and families in paediatric palliative care in Ireland: an adaptation study.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To identify existing legacy-making interventions for children in the context of palliative care, to evaluate the reported outcomes of these interventions, and to explore the perceptions and experiences of children, family members, and healthcare professionals regarding these interventions. Methods: A mixed-methods systematic review was conducted. Six English databases, including PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Embase, CINAHL via EBSCO, ProQuest Nursing & Allied Health Database, and PsycINFO via EBSCO, and three Chinese databases, including CNKI, Wanfang, and Weipu, were systematically searched from inception to July 21, 2024. Articles reporting the results of qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-methods studies related to legacy-making interventions for children receiving palliative care were selected. A meta-synthesis and a quantitative narrative synthesis were conducted, and the findings were integrated using a convergent segregated approach. Results: Twenty-one articles were included. Existing legacy-making interventions were categorized into tangible legacy items and living legacy projects. These interventions were found to have numerous benefits, such as improving children's quality of life, preserving dignity, fostering adaptive coping mechanisms for illness-specific stressors for both children and their parents, enhancing parent-child communication, and promoting psychosocial well-being. They also contributed to reducing compassion fatigue and burnout among healthcare professionals. The majority of children's and parents' experiences with legacy-making interventions were positive, with high acceptability of these interventions. Suggestions from family members and healthcare professionals for enhancing these interventions were also reported. Conclusions: Legacy-making interventions could benefit children, their families, and healthcare professionals. More rigorous clinical trials should be conducted to confirm the effects of these interventions in the future. Systematic review registration: This systematic review has been registered on PROSPERO (Registration No. CRD42024490925).
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.