Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42462542›Full record

ArticleIntensive & critical care nursing2026

Noticing and responding to end-of-life suffering in the PICU: A co-designed conceptual framework for nursing practice.

Elizabeth G Broden Arciprete, Kelly N Michelson, Shelli L Feder, Jerris W Marr, Nora Al-Roub, Suzanne R Gouda, Aubrey Mckenzie Jones, Ashleigh B Schopen, Alexandra K Tapper, Tracy A Pasek and 8 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Intensive & critical care nursing, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

18 authors.

Elizabeth G Broden ArcipreteNational Clinician Scholars Program, Yale University School of Medicine, Yale University School of Public Health, New Haven, CT, USA. Electronic address: brodenar@bc.edu.
Kelly N MichelsonDepartment of Pediatrics, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Pediatric Critical Care Medicine, Ann & Robert H. Lurie Children's Hospital of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
Shelli L FederYale School of Nursing, New Haven, CT, USA.
Jerris W MarrFaith's dad, Portland, OR, USA.
Nora Al-RoubSchool of Public Health, Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA.
Suzanne R GoudaDivision of Medical Critical Care, Department of Pediatrics, Boston Children's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.; Department of Supportive Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA.
Aubrey Mckenzie JonesHuman Sciences, Stephen F. Austin State University, Nacogdoches, TX, USA.
Ashleigh B SchopenChild Life Consulting, LLC., Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Alexandra K TapperCardiology, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Tracy A PasekClinical Nurse Specialist/ Systems Analyst, Healthcare Analytics, UPMC Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Reena J KellyDepartment of Population Health & Leadership, University of New Haven, New Haven, CT, USA.
Liz R MorrisCourageous Parents Network, Newton, MA, USA.
Aleksandra E OlszewskiPediatric Critical Care Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Christine GallagherCardiac Intensive Care Unit, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
J Allen TaylorNo affiliation.
Sarah Brand McCarthyRobert's Program on Sudden Unexpected Death in Pediatrics, Division of General Pediatrics, Department of Pediatrics, Boston Children's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Jennifer M SnamanDepartment of Supportive Oncology; Department of Pediatric Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Pediatrics, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Prasanna AnanthDepartment of Pediatrics, Cancer Outcomes, Public Policy and Effectiveness Research (COPPER) Center, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.

Funding

NRSA Training CoreTL1TR001864 · NCATS · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI CANTLEY, LLOYD G, EDELMAN, E. JENNIFER · 2016 to 2025
$9.9M
AHRQ HHS T32 HS017589NCATS NIH HHS TL1 TR001864
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesPediatric intensive care unit (PICU) nurses spend the most time with patients and families during a critical illness. However, nurses, families, and other clinicians conceptualize suffering differently, leaving some types of suffering when a child is nearing the end-of-life (EOL) unaddressed. PICU nurses are thus well-positioned but underequipped to address suffering during EOL. We aimed to 1) characterize distinctive features that indicate the presence and/or absence of suffering; and 2) identify nursing care responses that help attend to EOL suffering.

methodsUsing qualitative interpretive description, we collaborated with a purposive sample of bereaved parents and interdisciplinary health professionals, including nurses, to develop a conceptual model to better equip nurses to notice and respond to EOL suffering. The sample participated in 3 focus group discussions. Two coders generated descriptive codes from each focus group, which were revised with participants at subsequent sessions and then arranged into overarching categories. Categories and sub-categories were then co-designed into a conceptual model that was iteratively refined by participants and the research team.

resultsParticipants (N = 25) included 8 parents, 6 PICU nurses, 3 PICU physicians/advanced practice providers (APPs), 3 palliative care physicians/APPs, and 5 allied health professionals. Together with the research team, participants co-designed A Conceptual Framework to Guide Bedside Nursing Care to Address EOL Suffering, which relates four overlapping categories: 1) Noticeable Indicators for Acknowledgement and Validation, 2) Responsive Indicators for In-the-Moment Interventions, 3) Collaborative Responses, and 4) Dynamic Contextual Factors. Participants described that some indicators of suffering may be acknowledged and/or validated (such as shattered assumptive world) but not always eased. Whereas other indicators (such as physical and emotional expressions) may be responsive to in-the-moment interventions (such as facilitating opportunities for connection). Collaborative Responses included nurse strategies to address suffering such as partnering with parents, promoting connection and comfort, and connecting with resources. Dynamic Contextual Factors included external influences beyond the patient, family, and nurse, that shaped how nurses notice and respond to suffering, such as uncertainty.

conclusionsThis study helped operationalize indicators of and nurse-led responses to EOL suffering using a parent and clinician collaborative approach. The conceptual model can inform nurse-led, parent-partnered interventions to acknowledge and ease suffering among children nearing EOL and their families. IMPLICATIONS FOR CLINICAL PRACTICE: Some manifestations of suffering during EOL in the PICU may be readily addressable through nursing care while others may be witnessed and validated by nurses. Partnership between parents and nurses is a cornerstone of holistically addressing suffering.

Indexed as

Stress, PsychologicalTerminal CareAdultChildFemaleFocus GroupsHumansIntensive Care Units, PediatricMaleMiddle AgedParentsQualitative ResearchCommunity-based participatory researchFamily-centered carePalliative carePediatricsTerminal/end-of-life careUser centered design

Identifiers

PMID42462542
PMCPMC13459866

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.