ArticleClinical and experimental pediatrics2026
Moving toward meaningful shared decision-making in neonatal care: clinical practice and policy implications in Korea.
Article in Clinical and experimental pediatrics, 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.
- Shared Decision Making in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit in Low Middle Income Countries - A Myth or A Path to Reality.Indian journal of pediatrics · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Shared decision-making (SDM), which has become a core principle of patient-clinician communication, emphasizes respect for autonomy, partnership, and transparency. In neonatal practice-where decisions often carry profound ethical and emotional weight-SDM helps align medical recommendations with the family's values, fosters trust, and may reduce moral distress for both parents and clinicians. However, in Korea, the systematic recognition and formalization of SDM remains limited, underscoring the need for practical guidance and institutional support in neonatal and pediatric care. This review discusses key principles of SDM and illustrates their application in real clinical communication through hypothetical neonatal case vignettes. SDM is best understood not as a single model but as a continuum shaped by the balance between medical judgment and parental values. Drawing on Opel's stepwise framework, SDM is most appropriate when more than one medically reasonable option exists and value considerations meaningfully influence the choice. Physicians must also remain aware of personal biases that can shape how options are framed and discussed. Building on this conceptual foundation, this paper describes how meaningful SDM can be practiced using the 4 conversational phases outlined by Madrigal and Kelly: (1) acknowledging the need for a decision and inviting participation; (2) sharing information while listening; (3) uncovering values, hopes, and fears; and (4) reaching a balanced and ethically grounded decision. Through clinical examples, these phases demonstrate how empathy, pacing, and reflective dialogue can transform information exchange into shared moral reasoning. Finally, structural and cultural barriers continue to hinder the implementation of SDM in Korea, including time constraints, limited training, and restrictive legal frameworks. Policy reform, education, and team-based strategies are essential to support its broader adoption. SDM ultimately offers an ethically robust and relational framework for navigating complex, value-laden decisions in neonatal and pediatric care that is grounded in communication that recognizes bias and engages families as true partners.
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.