Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 378

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

End-of-Life Care Preferences of Pediatric Patients With Cancer

Hinds, Pamela S., Drew, Donna, Oakes, Linda L., Fouladi, Maryam, Spunt, Sheri L., Church, Christopher, Furman, Wayne L.·2005·Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract

Purpose: The viewpoint of the terminally ill child at the time of an end-of-life decision has not been formally investigated. We identified the preferences of children and adolescents with advanced cancer about their end-of-life care and the factors that influenced their decisions. Patients and Methods: Pediatric patients 10 or more years of age were interviewed within 7 days of participating in one of the following three end-of-life decisions: enrollment onto a phase I trial (n = 7), adoption of a do not resuscitate order (n = 5), or initiation of terminal care (n = 8). The patient, a parent, and the primary pediatric oncologist were interviewed separately by using open-ended interview questions. Results: Twenty patients, aged 10 to 20 years (mean, 17 years and 4 months), with a refractory solid tumor (n = 12), brain tumor (n = 4), or leukemia (n = 4) participated. Eighteen patients (90%) accurately recalled all of their treatment options and identified their own death as a consequence of their decision. The factors that were most frequently identified included the following: for patients, caring about others (n = 19 patients); for parents, the child's preferences (n = 18 parents); and for physicians, the patient's prognosis and comorbid conditions (n = 14 physicians). Conclusion: These children and adolescents with advanced cancer realized that they were involved in an end-of-life decision, understood the consequences of their decision, and were capable of participating in a complex decision process involving risks to themselves and others. The decision factors most frequently reported by patients were relationship based; this finding is contrary to existing developmental theories.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1200/jco.2005.10.538

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 378

Metadata

Authors
Hinds, P. S., Drew, D., Oakes, L. L., Fouladi, M., Spunt, S. L., Church, C., & Furman, W. L.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2005-12-20
Volume
23
Issue
36
Pages
9146-9154
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
OpenAlex
W2171744648
Cited by
378
References
1
FWCI
7.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: End-of-Life Care Preferences of Pediatric Patients With Cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2005.10.538
The paper
Hinds, P. S., Drew, D., Oakes, L. L., Fouladi, M., Spunt, S. L., Church, C., & Furman, W. L. (2005). End-of-Life Care Preferences of Pediatric Patients With Cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2005.10.538

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.