ArticleChildren (Basel, Switzerland)2026
"What's in It for the Kid?": An Approach for the Bedside Ethicist.
Article in Children (Basel, Switzerland), 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesAdvances in paediatric care have increased the survival of children with severe neurological impairment, often accompanied by complex disability, multimorbidity, and a substantial treatment burden. Determining whether interventions provide meaningful benefit to the child is ethically challenging, particularly when decision-making is shared between parents and clinicians, while the child has limited capacity to participate directly in decision-making. This paper examines the guiding question "what's in it for the kid?" as a means of strengthening child-centred ethical deliberation alongside established frameworks.
methodsWe undertook a conceptual bioethical analysis informed by clinical experience in an inner city tertiary public hospital. The analysis focuses on children with severe neurological impairment and medical complexity. The paper critically examines how the guiding question aligns with and extends key ethical constructs, including shared decision-making, the Zone of Parental Discretion, the Best Interests Standard, and care ethics. Clinical scenarios are used illustratively to demonstrate application in practice.
resultsExisting ethical frameworks form an important foundational structure for complex decision-making. The question "what's in it for the kid" translates ethical principles into a practical moral prompt that centres the child as the subject of decision-making. It facilitates clearer consideration of risks, benefits meaningful to the child and lived experience and helps to distinguish the child's interests from those of parents and clinicians. Its simplicity enhances accessibility and supports consistent use in complex, high-stakes decisions.
conclusions"What's in it for the kid?" is a pragmatic and accessible ethical prompt that complements established frameworks by translating them into clinically usable practice. It promotes explicit, child-focused deliberation and supports a more transparent and child-centred evaluation of benefit and burden, particularly in contexts of uncertainty and medical complexity.
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.