ReviewBMJ paediatrics open2026
Shifting the narrative: reframing paediatric palliative care to enable earlier engagement.
Review in BMJ paediatrics open, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPaediatric palliative care (PPC) provides holistic support for babies, children and young people with chronic and complex conditions and their families when facing uncertainty about the future. Although early PPC involvement improves symptom management, quality of life and shared decision-making, referral often occurs late. Misconceptions that equate PPC with end-of-life care, alongside clinicians' discomfort and concerns about diminishing hope, contribute to these delays. Communication is a modifiable barrier, and applying framing science may help clinicians introduce PPC earlier and with greater confidence. The aim of this paper is to outline evidence-informed framing strategies that support clearer, more constructive communication about PPC and encourage earlier engagement with palliative care services.
methodsThis narrative review synthesised literature relating to referral practices, professional barriers and communication in PPC alongside relevant insights from cognitive psychology and communication science. A structured search of MEDLINE, CINAHL and PsycINFO was conducted. Published narrative perception research examining public understanding of PPC was incorporated as contextual evidence. Findings were integrated using a narrative synthesis approach guided by Scale for the Assessment of Narrative Review Articles principles.
resultsEvidence indicates that referral timing is influenced not only by clinical uncertainty and systemic barriers but also by entrenched narratives surrounding palliative care. Studies of paediatric consultations demonstrate that variation in communication approaches can contribute to misaligned expectations and delayed engagement. Framing science suggests that intentional language, metaphor and narrative structure can reshape understanding, reduce discomfort and promote more constructive mindsets.
conclusionsLanguage and framing strongly shape perceptions of PPC and influence referral behaviour. Consistent use of evidence-informed framing strategies can help clinicians communicate more clearly and compassionately about PPC, reduce discomfort around referral conversations and support earlier access to services. Embedding these approaches across clinical teams, training programmes and organisations may contribute to more equitable, timely and family-centred palliative care.
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.