Navigating ethical challenges in the FORTEe randomised controlled trial: a multi-centre staff survey on exercise intervention for children and adolescents undergoing cancer treatment

The FORTEe randomised controlled trial (NCT05289739) investigates an exercise intervention for children and adolescents undergoing cancer treatment. Conducting research with this vulnerable population poses unique ethical challenges, including participant burden, child autonomy, and parental decision-making. This study explored the ethical experiences of healthcare professionals (HCPs) involved in the trial. A multicentre survey was conducted across ten clinical sites in Europe using a structured, browser-based questionnaire comprising both closed and open-ended questions. Domains included burden and benefits assessment, informed consent, child autonomy, parental influence and moral distress. Quantitative responses were analysed descriptively, while qualitative data underwent content analysis. Seventy-nine HCPs participated, including exercise professionals (n = 30), physicians (n = 19), nurses (n = 8), psychologists (n = 5), social workers (n = 3), one social scientist, one medical ethicist and 12 individuals in other roles. A large majority of respondents (86.1%) agreed or strongly agreed that the overall burden-benefit balance of trial participation was appropriate, while 11.4% were unsure and 2.5% disagreed. Open-text responses described perceived challenges related to questionnaire burden, logistical demands, and emotional discomfort associated with control-group allocation. Informed consent procedures were generally perceived as appropriate. However, some respondents reported situations in which parental influence appeared to outweigh children’s expressed preferences, and difficulties were noted in assessing children’s evolving decision-making capacity. Among HCPs who described prognosis-related events (n = 45), 68.9% described experiences they associated with moral distress, particularly in relation to communication and decisions regarding continuation of participation. The trial's ethical climate was largely perceived as positive, though emotional and logistical burdens were noted. Reports of emotional discomfort and moral distress among staff highlight the ethical tensions between research integrity and individual well-being. Furthermore, divergent views on children’s capacity to give consent suggest the need for clearer guidance on paediatric autonomy and shared decision-making. Ethically sound paediatric research must address real-world burdens and emotional dynamics beyond procedural compliance. Findings from the FORTEe trial staff survey highlight the importance of flexible, child-centred approaches, sustainable access to beneficial interventions, and institutional structures that promote ethical reflection. Registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05289739, 21 March 2022) and in the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00027978, 28 January 2022).

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
BMC Medical Ethics
Published
2026-02-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-026-01414-6
Primary Topic
Childhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Navigating ethical challenges in the FORTEe randomised controlled trial: a multi-centre staff survey on exercise intervention for children and adolescents undergoing cancer treatment

Ronja Beller, Barbara Konda, Rodolf Mongondry, Joachim Wiskemann et al.
BMC Medical Ethics
Childhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
article

Navigating ethical challenges in the FORTEe randomised controlled trial: a multi-centre staff survey on exercise intervention for children and adolescents undergoing cancer treatment

Ronja Beller, Barbara Konda, Rodolf Mongondry, Joachim Wiskemann, Eleonora Corti, Marco Chisari, Heidi Diel, Nikolai Bauer, Eila K. Watson, Marie A. Neu, Elias Dreismickenbecker, Lena Wypyrsczyk, Francesca Lanfranconi, Francesca Alt, M Götte, Alba Solera-Sanchez, Alejandro Lucı́a, Jörg Faber, Hayley Marriott, Linda Peli, Olivia Pérol, A. C. Balduzzi, N. W. Paul, Martin Bjørn Hansen, Eva Santa Cruz-Ramos, Martin Kaj Fridh, William Zardo, Emanuele Villa, Milica Stefanović, Domen Ravnik, Hanne Bækgaard Larsen, Carmen Fiuza-Luces, Tommaso Pietro Moriggi, Meta Rovan
article en

Abstract

The FORTEe randomised controlled trial (NCT05289739) investigates an exercise intervention for children and adolescents undergoing cancer treatment. Conducting research with this vulnerable population poses unique ethical challenges, including participant burden, child autonomy, and parental decision-making. This study explored the ethical experiences of healthcare professionals (HCPs) involved in the trial. A multicentre survey was conducted across ten clinical sites in Europe using a structured, browser-based questionnaire comprising both closed and open-ended questions. Domains included burden and benefits assessment, informed consent, child autonomy, parental influence and moral distress. Quantitative responses were analysed descriptively, while qualitative data underwent content analysis. Seventy-nine HCPs participated, including exercise professionals (n = 30), physicians (n = 19), nurses (n = 8), psychologists (n = 5), social workers (n = 3), one social scientist, one medical ethicist and 12 individuals in other roles. A large majority of respondents (86.1%) agreed or strongly agreed that the overall burden-benefit balance of trial participation was appropriate, while 11.4% were unsure and 2.5% disagreed. Open-text responses described perceived challenges related to questionnaire burden, logistical demands, and emotional discomfort associated with control-group allocation. Informed consent procedures were generally perceived as appropriate. However, some respondents reported situations in which parental influence appeared to outweigh children’s expressed preferences, and difficulties were noted in assessing children’s evolving decision-making capacity. Among HCPs who described prognosis-related events (n = 45), 68.9% described experiences they associated with moral distress, particularly in relation to communication and decisions regarding continuation of participation. The trial's ethical climate was largely perceived as positive, though emotional and logistical burdens were noted. Reports of emotional discomfort and moral distress among staff highlight the ethical tensions between research integrity and individual well-being. Furthermore, divergent views on children’s capacity to give consent suggest the need for clearer guidance on paediatric autonomy and shared decision-making. Ethically sound paediatric research must address real-world burdens and emotional dynamics beyond procedural compliance. Findings from the FORTEe trial staff survey highlight the importance of flexible, child-centred approaches, sustainable access to beneficial interventions, and institutional structures that promote ethical reflection. Registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05289739, 21 March 2022) and in the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00027978, 28 January 2022).

BMC Medical EthicsVol. 27(1)
Oxford Brookes University (GB), Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz (DE), Heidelberg University (DE), Ljubljana University Medical Centre (SI), Istituto Giannina Gaslini (IT), University Hospital Heidelberg (DE), Copenhagen University Hospital (DK), Rigshospitalet (DK), Institute for Water of the Republic of Slovenia (SI), Research Institute Hospital 12 de Octubre (ES), University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz (DE), Centre Léon Bérard (FR), National Center for Tumor Diseases (DE), Essen University Hospital (DE), Fondazione Lanza (IT), Istituti di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IT), Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori (IT), University of Milano-Bicocca (IT), Universidad Europea de Madrid (ES)
European Commission, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz, Universitätsmedizin der Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz
Climate action
Openalex Percentile: Top 43%
Childhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.