Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40678747›Full record

ArticlePEC innovation2025

Developing multi-perspective practice-based evidence theses for breaking bad news in the German pediatric oncology: A participatory group Delphi study.

Isabel Hamm, Kerstin Dittmer, Frank Vitinius, David Reinert, Marc Hoemberg, Remo Kamm-Thonwart, Rainer Misgeld, Theresia Krieger

Abstract readNews
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in PEC innovation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. In the end, it is the word that remains: communicating bad news in pediatric oncology.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    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

8 authors.

Isabel HammDepartment of Psychosomatics and Psychotherapy, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Germany.
Kerstin DittmerMedical Psychology | Neuropsychology and Gender Studies & Centre for Neuropsychological Diagnostics and Intervention (CeNDI), Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Germany.
Frank VitiniusDepartment of Psychosomatics and Psychotherapy, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Germany.
David ReinertMedical Psychology | Neuropsychology and Gender Studies & Centre for Neuropsychological Diagnostics and Intervention (CeNDI), Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Germany.
Marc HoembergDepartment of Pediatric Oncology and Hematology, Children's Hospital, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Remo Kamm-ThonwartSonnenstrahl e.V. Dresden - Support Organization for children and Adolescents with cancer, Dresden, Germany.
Rainer MisgeldDepartment of Pediatric Hematology and Oncology, Gemeinschaftsklinikum Mittelrhein, Koblenz, Germany.
Theresia KriegerMedical Psychology | Neuropsychology and Gender Studies & Centre for Neuropsychological Diagnostics and Intervention (CeNDI), Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: The study aimed to (1) gain a comprehensive, multi-perspective understanding of the preparation, transmission and follow-up of Breaking Bad News (BBN) in pediatric oncology, and (2) to develop and weigh recommendations for BBN in pediatric oncology. Methods: A mixed-methods Participatory Group Delphi (PGD) study was conducted to develop recommendations for the preparation, transmission, and follow-up of BBN. Practice-based evidence (PBE) was collected from four groups ( Results: The PGD process (16 interviews, three focus group discussions and two surveys) resulted in 166 recommendations (preparation: 55; transmission: 45; follow-up: 66). Conclusion: The PGD approach provided a structured framework for collecting PBE and developing, refining and consolidating recommendations on BBN in pediatric oncology. Involving all affected by BBN was crucial for addressing the complexity of BBN in the recommendations. The mixed-methods design enhanced the reliability and practical applicability of the recommendations. Innovation: To our knowledge, no prior research in pediatric oncology has systematically integrated existing PBE into a structured set of recommendations in Germany. This study introduces a novel PGD process in this field in Germany, incorporating three key innovations: (1) a participatory methodology ensuring active stakeholder engagement, (2) a uniquely diverse expert panel including those affected by pediatric cancer, and (3) a systematic, iterative recommendation development approach rooted in PBE. This methodology results in a Delphi process that diverges significantly from classical approaches, offering a collaborative and structured framework for evidence synthesis.

Indexed as

Breaking bad newsMixed-methodsParticipationParticipatory group DelphiPediatric oncologyTriadic communication

Identifiers

PMID40678747
PMCPMC12270057

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.