ArticlePediatrics2026
Hope and Uncertainty in Prognostic Discussions.
Article in Pediatrics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Language of Hope in Conversations between Pediatric Oncologists, Children with Advanced Cancer, and their Families.Research square · 2026Article
- "The Most Difficult Conversations We Have": Resident Experiences With Pediatric Neuroprognostication.Annals of the Child Neurology Society · 2026Article
- Mapping the Patient Journey of Oral Microbiota Transplantation During Radiotherapy: A Qualitative Study.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivePrognostic communication is vital to high-quality care for children with serious illness. Yet clinicians often struggle to balance honesty with preservation of hope-especially when prognosis is poor or uncertain. Patients and parents cite hope and uncertainty as central themes in their communication needs, but guidance for clinicians is lacking. This study aimed to characterize patient, parent, and oncologist recommendations for strategies to navigate hope and uncertainty during prognostic discussions.
methodsSemistructured interviews were conducted with pediatric patients with poor-prognosis cancer (n = 25), parents of patients on therapy (n = 30), bereaved parents (n = 10), and pediatric oncologists (n = 20) from 6 institutions across 5 US states. Participants were asked whether oncologists could support hope while discussing poor prognosis and how oncologists should discuss uncertain prognostic information. Rapid analysis yielded themes in participant recommendations.
resultsNearly all participants agreed that oncologists can support hope while discussing poor prognosis. Participants emphasized that honesty-about prognosis and uncertainty-can support, rather than diminish, hope. Most participants described recommended strategies for how to navigate hope and uncertainty during prognostic communication. Four themes were identified in recommendations: (1) prioritize honesty, (2) provide leadership, guidance, and expertise, (3) provide compassionate, individualized support, and (4) acknowledge inherent uncertainty as space for hope.
conclusionProviding honest, individualized communication can foster hope and manage uncertainty for children with cancer and their families. Results will guide development of communication tools to strengthen education and bedside care, equipping clinicians to meet the diverse needs and preferences of families facing childhood cancer.
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.