ArticleBMC palliative care2025
Supporting infants with severe perinatal diagnoses, their families and healthcare providers: development of a perinatal palliative care program.
Article in BMC palliative care, 2025. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPerinatal palliative care (PPC) provides essential support for families and healthcare providers at the end-of-life. Despite clear global need, structured PPC programs are not widely established.
aimTo develop a PPC program that supports families confronted with a severe perinatal diagnosis for their (unborn) child, with a focus on evidence-based development of such program, ensuring care is effective, consistent, and aligned with best practices.
methodsWe systematically designed a PPC program following a 7-step method, using Bleijenberg's extended Medical Research Council framework. We conducted a qualitative interview study with 22 healthcare providers and 18 bereaved parents from six hospitals to identify care gaps alongside an integrative review study of international programs. These combined findings informed the development of a PPC prototype program, intended to be integrated in routine practice. Subsequently, we refined the program, identified barriers to implementation, and explored opportunities for contextual tailoring through six participatory workshops involving both healthcare providers and bereaved parents at three hospitals. In these sessions we reviewed the preliminary care components, identified practical challenges, and adapted the model to align with local workflows, staffing realities, and documentation systems.
resultsFive core components were developed: 1. Dedicated fixed PPC Team with care coordinators 2. Formal/Specialized 1,5 day training covering essential PPC aspects 3. Stepwise PPC Approach with a structured PPC plan including individualized care pathways and centralized resources and information sharing 4. Proactive psychological support for both families and staff 5. Structured Team Debriefings Key barriers to implementation included fragmented documentation systems, limited staffing and time resources, and challenges in cross-departmental coordination. DISCUSSION: We developed a PPC program based on existing international evidence and current PPC practices. This approach ensured both relevance and practical applicability. The program design is a strength, as it is grounded in evidence and shaped through active involvement of parents and healthcare providers, with attention to contextual tailoring. The program is now ready for pilot testing to assess feasibility and acceptability in clinical practice. Future implementation will require institutional support, contextual adaptation, and ongoing evaluation to ensure sustainable integration into perinatal care.
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.