ArticlePEC innovation2025
Development and acceptability testing of a tracheostomy decision support video for parents.
Article in PEC innovation, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To develop a clinical, bedside intervention with peer parent narratives to help parents understand the shared decision-making (SDM) process, their role in the decision, and other parents' considerations in this context. Patient involvement: To ensure that the intervention reflected parents' needs, we identified eight parents who had faced a tracheostomy decision for their child and were willing to talk about their experiences on a video recording. Half of the parents had chosen tracheostomy; some children of parents making either choice had died. We included parents of diverse racial backgrounds whose children had different diagnoses. Parent interviews, along with an explanation of SDM for parents, were edited into a 17-min video guided by iterative feedback from parents and clinicians. Additional parents of children with tracheostomies then viewed the video and shared perceptions about acceptability. Methods: After an iterative process of developing the video in partnership with parents, we piloted the video with 18 parents in 16 online interviews (two were couples) who were not part of video development but had faced a tracheostomy decision for their child within the last three years. Participants were asked about their experiences, viewed the video, and provided verbal feedback and reflection on the acceptability of the video and its anticipated clinical use. Interviews were transcribed and qualitatively analyzed, focusing on feedback. Results: Parents who viewed the video provided generally favorable feedback, describing the video as "helpful," and appreciating the diversity of the cases represented and the perspectives offered. They felt that it could empower parents to ask questions and voice their opinions to the medical team. Parents noted feeling a connection to the emotions expressed by the parents in the video and felt it would help parents facing these decisions to feel less alone. Discussion/practical value: Video education focusing on parents' perspectives may help support the SDM process for pediatric tracheostomy and complement other strategies to support parent engagement. Similar approaches may be valuable in explaining SDM to patients or families facing other serious decisions.
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.