ArticlePsycho-oncology2026
Communication Barriers and Facilitators to Specialist Pediatric Palliative Care Involvement in Pediatric Oncology Settings Across Canada.
Article in Psycho-oncology, 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
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo examine how healthcare provider communication shapes referral, acceptance and ongoing integration of specialist pediatric palliative care (SPPC).
methodsA qualitative study was conducted across four pediatric cancer centers in Canada. Sixty-six healthcare providers working in oncology and palliative care settings participated in in-depth interviews. Participants included physicians, nurses, psycho-social clinicians and other members of the interprofessional health team. Transcripts were analyzed using iterative, inductive coding based on the Grounded Theory method.
resultsCommunication barriers to referral and acceptance included inadequate explanations for SPPC involvement, incomplete or misleading descriptions of services, and framing SPPC solely as end-of-life care. Oncologist discomfort, avoidance, and use of ambiguous "coded" language further hindered referral conversations. Facilitators included strong communication skills, clear and comprehensive explanations of SPPC, and age-appropriate engagement with patients. For ongoing integration of SPPC, poor interprofessional communication and unclear role and responsibilities among team members created risks for fragmented care. In contrast, structured collaboration such as joint meetings, shared care planning, and proactive information exchange, supported effective integration of SPPC and consistent messaging to patients and families.
conclusionsCommunication is central to successful SPPC referral, acceptance, and integration in pediatric oncology settings. Both clinician-family and interprofessional communication practices directly shaped understanding and engagement with SPPC services. Interventions should prioritize communication training, clearer framing of SPPC, and enhanced collaboration between teams. Early involvement of the psychosocial provider along with an SPPC specialist may further improve communication and uptake, ultimately strengthening care for children with serious illness and their families.
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.