ArticleJournal of pain and symptom management2026
Beyond the Label: How Naming and Framing Impact Pediatric Palliative Care Acceptance.
Article in Journal of pain and symptom management, 2026. 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
Abstract
contextPediatric palliative care (PPC) underutilization persists despite proven benefits. Some barriers stem from the misconception that PPC is exclusively for end-of-life, causing parental distress and reticence to engage. This study explores the origins of these misconceptions to enable smoother introduction of this helpful service line.
objectivesThis study examines how program naming and the framing of PPC services impacts perceptions of, and receptiveness to, PPC services among community-dwelling parents in the United States.
methodsA national sample of 363 U.S. parents recruited via Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk). Participants were randomly assigned to one of four vignettes introducing a PPC team. Introductions varied team name ("palliative care" vs. "Pediatric Advanced Care Team [PACT]") and frame (with/without explicit end-of-life mention). Questions assessed demographics, perceptions of, and willingness to engage with, PPC. Analyses included inferential statistics and Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA).
resultsThere were no significant differences in the reception of PPC based on team name or the inclusion of end-of-life language. EFA identified two latent factors accounting for 76.46% of the variance: 1) Best Interest (parent's perception that the services were beneficial) and 2) Parental Distress (parent's perception of being overwhelmed when considering the service).
conclusionParental perceptions of PPC are predicated on underlying factors that may constitute referral barriers. In this study, neither renaming the team nor excluding the mention of end-of-life impacted participants' enthusiasm. Future interventions should look beyond name changes to characterize and directly address the latent factors of parental distress and the perceived best interests of the child.
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.