ArticleJournal of pediatrics. Clinical practice2026
Integration of Pediatric Palliative Care in Oncology: A Scoping Review.
Article in Journal of pediatrics. Clinical practice, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Pediatric palliative care (PPC) enhances quality of life for children with cancer and their families, yet its systematic integration into oncology practice remains limited, particularly in hospital-based care. This scoping review aimed to map and synthesize international evidence on how PPC is designed, implemented, and evaluated in pediatric oncology inpatient settings, and to identify key barriers and facilitators to its clinical integration. Methods: We conducted a comprehensive search of MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Web of Science (2014-2025). Reporting followed PRISMA-ScR standards. Data were charted and narratively synthesized. Results: Thirty-four studies from 18 countries met inclusion criteria. Most used qualitative methods (n = 12), followed by retrospective chart reviews (n = 7), surveys (n = 4), and reviews or guidelines (n = 11). Evidence revealed delayed initiation of PPC, heterogeneous service models, and limited outcome evaluation. Seven recurrent barriers emerged: absence of standardized models, structural constraints, inadequate staff training, suboptimal communication and family engagement, emotional and cultural barriers, psychosocial strain, and insufficient evaluation frameworks. Conclusions: These findings highlight a global need to integrate early, family-centered PPC within pediatric oncology inpatient care. Health systems should prioritize staff training, establish adaptable interdisciplinary models, and implement structured evaluation strategies to strengthen the quality and consistency of PPC delivery.
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.