ArticleBMJ paediatrics open2026
Perspectives of paediatricians on collecting children's and caregivers' preferences for outcomes relevant to patients: a qualitative interview study in China.
Article 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo explore the experiences and perspectives of paediatricians in China regarding how children and caregivers may be involved in identifying patient-relevant outcomes for core outcome set (COS) development.
methodsThis was a descriptive qualitative study. We conducted semistructured and audio-recorded interviews with paediatricians from China. We used purposive sampling to ensure diversity in terms of gender, geographical region and clinical specialty. Data were obtained as part of the project (Guidance on Children's and Caregivers' Participation in the Core Outcome Sets Development). The interviews were conducted in China between August and December 2024.
results23 paediatricians (65.2% female; 43.5% with more than 20 years of clinical experience) were interviewed. Participants represented five major geographical regions of China (Northwest, Southwest, Central, East and South) and covered 21 clinical specialties. Respondents broadly acknowledged the importance of children's and caregivers' participation in COS development. In addition, drawing on the Chinese context, they put forward perspectives for implementation: respondents proposed that children aged around 7 years and older may be able to provide basic views with appropriate support, whereas those aged around 10 years and older were perceived as particularly suitable for individual interviews when developmentally appropriate and adequately supported. Most respondents cautioned against excluding caregivers with limited health literacy, favouring tailored support over exclusion and recommended engaging patients with acute or critical conditions after clinical stabilisation, alongside narrative interviewing. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: This study provides practice-based insights from paediatricians in China on how children and caregivers may be involved in identifying patient-relevant outcomes, particularly for COS development. The findings should be interpreted as clinicians' perspectives and complemented by future research that directly involves children and caregivers.
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.