Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40940033›Full record

ReviewNursing ethics2026

Relational autonomy in pediatric healthcare: A scoping review.

Amarens Matthiesen, Nicole Drumm, Alison J Gerlach, Donna Koller, Tieghan Killackey

Abstract readScoping ReviewReview
In one paragraph

Review in Nursing ethics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. When the Child Is Not Heard: Children's Rights and Epistemic Injustice in Paediatric Nursing Practice.Nursing philosophy : an international journal for healthcare professionals · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
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

5 authors.

Amarens MatthiesenSchool of Early Childhood Studies, Faculty of Community Services, Toronto Metrpolitan University, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-7221-0566
Nicole DrummSchool of Nursing, York University, North York, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0009-0006-8594-8053
Alison J GerlachSchool of Child and Youth Care, Faculty of Education, University of Victoria, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-2720-6768
Donna KollerSchool of Early Childhood Studies, Faculty of Community Services, Toronto Metrpolitan University, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-8561-5618
Tieghan KillackeyLawrence Bloomberg Faculty of Nursing, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-2941-4058

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BackgroundThe concept of relational autonomy has gained popularity for accentuating the social embeddedness of autonomy. In pediatrics, relational autonomy provides a framework for conceptualizing the complexities of healthcare processes, such as shared decision-making and children's transitions to adult care systems. However, a lack of clarity exists regarding how to define and operationalize relational autonomy in pediatric healthcare. To our knowledge, no reviews of literature have been conducted to better understand this concept in pediatrics and guide further research.Research AimThe purpose of this scoping review was to describe literature focusing on relational approaches to autonomy in the context of pediatric healthcare.Research designA scoping review methodology proposed by Arksey and O'Malley and the Joanna Briggs Institute guided this review. Seven databases were searched for literature published between 2004 and 2024. Out of 2895 potentially relevant publications, a total of 28 articles were included for review.Ethical ConsiderationsThis study was conducted and reported in accordance with recognized scientific scoping review guidelines.FindingsVarious terms were used to describe relational approaches to autonomy in pediatrics. These terms shared a common goal of promoting a more holistic view of children and their decision-making processes in pediatric care. Most articles relied on adult perspectives (e.g., caregivers and healthcare providers) to shed light on shared decision-making processes. The perspectives of children and nurses were underrepresented in the literature, especially in the context of the Global South.ConclusionAdditional research is needed to capture the lived experiences of a wider range of individuals with developing and exercising autonomy using diverse research methods. As the perspectives of nurses and children remain excluded from literature, new knowledge on their experiences with autonomy can inform the delivery of care that is ethically and morally sound.

Indexed as

PediatricsRelational AutonomyChildHumansChildrendecision-makinghealthcarepediatricrelational autonomyscoping review

Identifiers

PMID40940033
PMCPMC12907465

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.