ArticlePalliative & supportive care2026
A qualitative study exploring the pros and cons of universal pediatric palliative care referral at diagnosis for children with cancer.
Article in Palliative & supportive care, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEarly integration of pediatric palliative care (PPC) offers significant benefits for children with cancer, yet referrals often occur late in the child's cancer trajectory.
objectivesAs part of a larger project looking at barriers and facilitators to early integration of PPC, this study explored the perspectives of healthcare providers (HCPs) on the pros and cons of a universal referral system where all children with cancer are referred to PPC at diagnosis.
methodsUsing the grounded theory method, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 66 oncology and PPC providers across 4 tertiary cancer centers in Canada. Interviews were coded line-by-line to explore patterns and themes across the dataset.
resultsThree key benefits emerged that included: reducing stigma and normalizing PPC as standard care, fostering early relationship building with patients and families, and minimizing HCP subjectivity in making PPC referrals. Cons included the idea that universal referral was a poor use of resources, particularly for children with curable cancers, and that this system lacked usefulness for patients and families. SIGNIFICANCE OF
resultsUniversal referral can promote equitable, timely, and family-centered integration of PPC in pediatric oncology. However, these types of referral systems face substantial challenges, particularly around resources. There was also wide variation of opinions and acceptability of universal referral among providers. The adoption of standardized or tiered referral criteria, guided by disease risk, prognosis, or symptom burden, may represent a practical middle ground. Future work should evaluate the impact of such criteria-based referral models on patient and family outcomes, provider experiences, and healthcare resource use.
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.