ArticleJournal of advanced nursing2026
A Nurse-Led, School-Based Social and Educational Intervention for Siblings of Children With Cancer (SUPREME): Process Evaluation of Perceived Impacts.
Article in Journal of advanced nursing, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A Nurse-Led, School-Based Social and Educational Intervention for Siblings of Children With Cancer (SUPREME): Process Evaluation of Perceived Impacts.Journal of advanced nursing · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo explore siblings' and parents' experiences of, and perceived impacts of, a nurse-led school-based intervention (SUPREME) for siblings of children with cancer in Denmark.
designA qualitative process evaluation.
methodsFifteen siblings (aged 6-14 years) and 16 parents were recruited through criterion-based sampling following siblings' participation in the SUPREME intervention. Data consisted of semi-structured interviews and open-ended responses from an evaluation form, and were analysed thematically. Data were collected between May 2024 and February 2025.
resultsThe intervention created a sense of normality for siblings by providing age-appropriate and credible information in the familiar school context, thereby strengthening the understanding of the family's cancer journey. The SUPREME nurse played a key role in easing the communication burden on siblings and parents, while also promoting recognition of siblings within the hospital setting as active participants in the family's cancer journey. Additionally, the intervention was perceived to accommodate varying levels of support needs across families.
conclusionThe SUPREME intervention benefited siblings-and, by extension, their families-by equipping siblings with essential information, guiding their class communities on how to offer appropriate support and fostering siblings' inclusion in the family's cancer journey. The SUPREME intervention constitutes a new strategy for accessible, universal sibling support. IMPLICATIONS FOR PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: The healthcare system should formally ensure that professionals working with families affected by severe paediatric conditions provide family-centred care that actively includes siblings. IMPACT: What problem did the study address? The position of siblings of children with cancer is often complex, as they may simultaneously serve as visible front figures of the family while remaining overlooked. This study explored how parents and siblings of children with cancer experienced participating in a new sibling support intervention. What were the main findings? Nurses play a central role in supporting siblings of children with cancer by bridging family, hospital and school contexts. Where and on whom will the research have an impact? Nurse-led, cross-sectoral interventions such as SUPREME may help normalise siblings' everyday lives and promote their inclusion in the family's cancer journey. REPORTING
methodThis study followed the Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research checklist. PATIENT AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT: No patients, participants, or members of the public were involved in the design of this specific study.
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.