ArticleSystematic reviews2026
Identifying the knowledge needs and preferences of parents of children with rare diseases regarding clinical trials: a scoping review protocol.
Article in Systematic reviews, 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.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRare diseases (i.e., incidence of <1/2000) are individually uncommon, but collectively these 10,000 conditions affect an estimated 473 million people globally, and approximately 70% of rare diseases manifest in childhood. Despite this global impact, 90% of rare diseases lack effective treatment. Treatments for rare diseases are often identified through clinical trials. Identifying parents' knowledge needs and preferences regarding pediatric rare disease clinical trials is an important aspect of empowering parents, improving clinical research practices, and potentially improving recruitment to these vital trials. The aim of the scoping review is to determine the extent, range, and characteristics of the evidence on the knowledge needs and preferences of parents regarding pediatric rare disease clinical trials.
methodsA scoping review will be conducted to identify sources of literature on the topic. A systematic search strategy co-developed with a research librarian will be conducted in six databases (Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, and PsycINFO). Gray literature will be searched via Google, Perplexity AI, the ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global database, and relevant rare disease organizational websites. Abstract and full-text screening will be conducted by two reviewers independently. Studies in English will be included regardless of study design, date of publication, or location of study/publication. Study quality will be appraised using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Data will be extracted including study characteristics, population, phenomena under investigation, and knowledge needs and preferences identified. Analysis will involve a descriptive numerical summary and qualitative content analysis. Findings will be presented in evidence tables, and patterns, themes, and gaps across the data will be reported using a narrative approach. DISCUSSION: This review will provide an overview of the existing literature regarding parents' knowledge needs and preferences about pediatric rare disease clinical trials. The findings of this review will inform future research and the development of knowledge translation resources for parents of children with rare diseases. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: This protocol has been registered in Open Science Framework (registration: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/QXR8G ).
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.