ArticleRevista latino-americana de enfermagem2026
Symbolic Interactionism and Grounded Theory in research on the health of children and adolescents: a scoping review.
Article in Revista latino-americana de enfermagem, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveto map the theoretical-methodological application of Symbolic Interactionism and Grounded Theory in research on the health of children and adolescents.
methoda scoping review conducted in accordance with the recommendations of the JBI. The following elements were considered: Participants - children and/or adolescents, family members, and professionals; Concepts - Symbolic Interactionism and Grounded Theory; Context - not delimited. Nine electronic sources were consulted, including original articles, without language or time restrictions. Rayyan and NVivo software were used for study selection and data synthesis.
resultsfifty-nine studies were included. Most participants were adolescents (49%) and family members (40%). Regarding the theoretical perspective, 42% adopted Blumer's framework and 67% Strauss's methodology. The combination of data collection strategies was reported in 34% of the studies; analytical resources such as diagrams and memos were cited in 42% and 39% of the studies, respectively. Only 24% reported theory validation. The hospital setting was the most frequently investigated context (27%).
conclusionthe combination of data collection strategies enables greater analytical diversity and investigations across different sociocultural and intersectoral contexts, contributing to the development of substantive theories. Future studies including the simultaneous participation of children, adolescents, family members, and professionals are recommended.
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.