Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42778918›Full record

ArticleBMC medical ethics2026

Developing a prospective ethical governance framework for a discrete choice experiment involving children aged 6-12 years: the PREF-ANX Kids study.

Inês Martins Esteves, Márcia Pestana-Santos, Filipa Sampaio, Margarida Reis Santos

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical ethics, 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

4 authors.

Inês Martins EstevesDepartment of Public Health and Caring Sciences, Uppsala Health Economics, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden. ines.martins@uu.se.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8867-7424
Márcia Pestana-SantosUICISA:E - Health Sciences Research Unit: Nursing, Coimbra, Portugal.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4093-0291
Filipa SampaioDepartment of Public Health and Caring Sciences, Uppsala Health Economics, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5540-9853
Margarida Reis SantosSchool of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7948-9317

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDiscrete choice experiments (DCEs) are quantitative preference-elicitation methods, developed largely within health economics, in which participants choose repeatedly between hypothetical scenarios composed of systematically varied attributes. Their growing use with children supports children's right to be heard in decisions affecting their care, yet it also raises ethical challenges that general paediatric research ethics guidance does not address in operational detail: sustained cognitive demand, potential emotional distress, assent that can blur under clinical stress, parental influence, clinician-researcher role conflict, and the processing of children's personal data.

methodsWe developed a prospective ethical governance framework during the preparatory phase of the PREF-ANX Kids study (Preferences for Preoperative Anxiety Management in Children), a planned multicentre DCE examining preferences for nursing interventions to manage preoperative anxiety among children aged 6-12 years undergoing elective surgery in Portuguese public hospitals, their parents, and healthcare professionals. Development combined a pragmatic, non-systematic synthesis of ethical, regulatory, and methodological guidance with iterative structured discussion within an interdisciplinary team. No formal consensus method was applied, and no children or families were involved in development; we identify this as a limitation. FRAMEWORK: The framework comprises four domains operating across the research lifecycle: relational participation, cognitive and emotional safeguarding, reflexive professional responsibility, and privacy stewardship. For each domain it specifies planned procedures (continuous assent and dissent monitoring, adapted task burden, structured reflexive documentation, and a prospective data protection impact assessment) together with their normative justification, and it distinguishes elements specific to PREF-ANX Kids from elements potentially adaptable to other paediatric DCEs. Trade-offs between competing ethical and methodological priorities are made explicit rather than resolved silently.

conclusionsThe framework is prospective: it has not yet been implemented or empirically evaluated, and no claims of demonstrated effectiveness are made. It is intended to support transparent ethical planning of DCEs involving children aged 6-12 years and will be assessed during the PREF-ANX Kids study. Future refinement should incorporate co-design with children and families and empirical evaluation of feasibility, acceptability, participant experience, and data quality.

Indexed as

AnxietyChoice BehaviorEthics, ResearchPatient PreferenceChildDecision MakingElective Surgical ProceduresFemaleHumansMaleParentsPortugalProspective StudiesResearch DesignAssentChildren’s participationData protectionDiscrete choice experimentPaediatric preference researchPaediatric research ethics

Identifiers

PMID42778918
PMCPMC13599126

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.