ArticleResearch square2026
Language of Hope in Conversations between Pediatric Oncologists, Children with Advanced Cancer, and their Families.
Article in Research square, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose: Hope is a key driver of coping and decision-making for children with cancer and their families. Prior studies have shown that hope is bolstered, not fractured, by high-quality prognostic communication. However, clinicians describe a tension between conveying hope and honestly discussing poor prognosis. This prospective longitudinal observational study aimed to identify and characterize communication approaches used by oncologists and parents to navigate hope in the context of poor prognosis. Methods: Serial conversations between pediatric patients with poor-prognosis brain tumors, their families, and their medical teams were audio-recorded at disease reevaluation timepoints for up to 24 months or until death. Rapid qualitative analysis was used to characterize the frequency and content of hope-related dialogue. Results: 132 conversations were recorded for 30 brain tumor patient-parent-oncologist triads.Hope-related dialogue was identified in 73 (55%) of encounters. Oncologists introduced hope language in about two-thirds of these conversations. Hope dialogue could be described along two dimensions: temporal orientation and desired outcomes. Temporally, hope appeared in conversations as prospective, retrospective, or negated. Desired outcomes included hope for cure, hope for remission, hope for life prolongation and meaningful experiences, and hope for symptom management and comfort at the end of life. Conclusion: Hope dialogue may be an entry point for aligning with families, exploring prognostic understanding, and opening the door to deeper conversations about reframing hopes and goals of care. Future work should explore development of strategies to elicit and respond to patient and family hopes across the cancer trajectory.
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.