ReviewBJC reports2026
Outcome measurement tools in pediatric oncology palliative care: a scoping review of domains, validation and contextual relevance.
Review in BJC reports, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Paediatric palliative care (PPC) in oncology plays a crucial role in enhancing the quality of life for children with cancer and their families. However, outcome measurement in this context remains fragmented, with tools often lacking validation, paediatric specificity, or contextual relevance, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). This scoping review maps the outcome measurement tools used in paediatric oncology palliative care, examining their assessed domains, psychometric properties and cultural, linguistic and health-system contextual relevance, particularly in LMICs. We systematically searched six databases from 2006 to 2025 and identified 27 eligible studies reporting on 28 unique tools across six key domains: symptom burden, quality of life, psychological well-being, spiritual health, caregiver burden and end-of-life care. While tools like Paediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL) and Symptom Screening in Pediatrics Tool (SSPedi) showed strong psychometric performance, only a few had been adapted for LMIC contexts. The psychological and spiritual domains were underrepresented, and most tools relied on proxy reporting, which limited child-centred assessments. The findings suggest the need for validated, culturally sensitive and inclusive tools co-developed with children and caregivers. Establishing such outcome measures is essential to ensuring equitable, high-quality palliative care across diverse settings. This review lays the groundwork for developing tools and advancing policies that support comprehensive and compassionate care for children with cancer. Review registration: The review is registered on Open Science Framework (OSF) https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/G8BN3 .
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.