ArticleBMC palliative care2025
Priorities for research in perinatal palliative care: an international Delphi study.
Article in BMC palliative care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Key practical aspects of perinatal palliative care: a scoping review mapping and grading their coverage in the literature.BMC palliative care · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPerinatal palliative care (PPC) addresses the complex needs of families facing life-limiting fetal or neonatal conditions through an interdisciplinary, family-centered approach. Despite growing recognition of its importance, there is a lack of systematically defined research priorities to guide the development of evidence-based PPC practices.
objectiveTo identify and establish research priorities for perinatal palliative care (PPC) using a Delphi method with international experts and parents who experienced perinatal loss.
methodsThis Delphi study involved three Delphi survey rounds with experts and bereaved parents. Participants provided and refined research priorities across rounds. In the first round, participants provided suggestions for research topics spontaneously. Topics were analyzed using principles of thematic analysis and further rated and ranked based on their importance in two additional rounds of consensual scoring. Consensus was defined as a score above the mean from at least 75% of respondents.
resultsA total of 125 experts and 10 parents who experienced a perinatal loss were invited to participate in the study. Response rate in the three rounds was 24, 31, and 34%. A total of 187 research priorities were initially suggested, resulting in 34 topics reaching consensus. Final rankings and priority topics were categorized into seven thematic areas: organization of care, decision-making and communication, staff support and education, ethics, symptom management, bereavement, and family experience.
conclusionsThis study identified critical research areas in PPC, providing a roadmap for future research to enhance support for families and healthcare providers in PPC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.