Against a backdrop of increasing debate regarding children's voice and position within health care and the struggle to effectively implement Family-Centred Care (FCC) in practice, the concept of Child-Centred Care (CCC) has emerged. The purpose of this paper is to explore the concept of CCC and its potential theoretical alignment with an ecological approach to health care. The paper will draw on practice-based research, highlighting the differences and similarities of CC against the more established FCC. Arguments will be presented to show that rather than competing with FCC, CCC has the potential to complement or extend traditional FCC, by placing children in a more prominent and central position than that which they currently hold within health care.

Children continue to experience harm when undergoing clinical procedures despite increased evidence of the need to improve the provision of child-centred care. The international ISupport collaboration aimed to develop standards to outline and explain good procedural practice and the rights of children within the context of a clinical procedure. The rights-based standards for children undergoing tests, treatments, investigations, examinations and interventions were developed using an iterative, multi-phased, multi-method and multi-stakeholder consensus building approach. This consensus approach used a range of online and face to face methods across three phases to ensure ongoing engagement with multiple stakeholders. The views and perspectives of 203 children and young people, 78 parents and 418 multi-disciplinary professionals gathered over a two year period (2020–2022) informed the development of international rights-based standards for the care of children having tests, treatments, examinations and interventions. The standards are the first to reach international multi-stakeholder consensus on definitions of supportive and restraining holds. Conclusion: This is the first study of its kind which outlines international rights-based procedural care standards from multi-stakeholder perspectives. The standards offer health professionals and educators clear evidence-based tools to support discussions and practice changes to challenge prevailing assumptions about holding or restraining children and instead encourage a focus on the interests and rights of the child. What is Known:• Children continue to experience short and long-term harm when undergoing clinical procedures despite increased evidence of the need to improve the provision of child-centred care.• Professionals report uncertainty and tensions in applying evidence-based practice to children’s procedural care. What is New:• This is the first study of its kind which has developed international rights-based procedural care standards from multi-stakeholder perspectives.• The standards are the first to reach international multi-stakeholder consensus on definitions of supportive and restraining holds.

The call for researchers to obtain children’s informed assent, prior to their participation in medical procedures and research, has increased over recent years and parallels moves to implement child-centred approaches to health care. This article describes the processes used to include children in developing a research information sheet and assent form for use in future research into children’s understandings of their surgery and hospital experiences. The process involved primary school children aged between six and 12 years. Children worked in small groups to consider information to include in these documents. Their words were collated to construct the research information sheet and assent form. Working with children resulted in documents that were more understandable for their intended audience. The article includes discussion of ‘language’, ‘understandability’ and ‘readability’; concepts that researchers seeking to work with children need to come to terms with if they are to obtain ‘informed assent’.

Children can sometimes find it difficult to articulate their experiences if they have to rely solely on words. Giving children the opportunity to use arts-based research approaches can support their participation in research and create a bridge that enables them to express their perspectives and feelings. This paper focuses on the ethical and practical considerations when using photo elicitation interviews (PEI) in research with children. The discussion and examples provided are drawn from an international study that used auto-driven PEI, where photographs are taken by children themselves, to explore children’s experiences of living with a chronic condition and the impact condition management may have on their everyday lives. In this paper we critically explore the issues arising from our use of PEI including children’s participation and engagement, balancing power and control, and keeping children safe. The main areas of focus for the paper are how PEI provided a means of shifting control; how setting photographic boundaries influenced our PEI study with children; and how we addressed risks associated with the method. Our experience shows that PEI is an engaging and valuable research method, providing a powerful medium for obtaining rich data with children. However, PEI is challenging and it requires researchers to conscientiously address ethical and practical aspects that extend beyond those inherent to standard (words-alone) interviews.

Although child-centred care is increasingly referred to within the nursing literature, a clear definition of child-centred care and clarity around the concept is yet to be achieved. The objectives of this review were to examine the following: (1) What constitutes the concept of child-centred care in healthcare? (2) How has the concept of child-centred care developed? (3) What is the applicability of child-centred care and what are its limitations? (4) How does the concept of child-centred care benefit and inform children’s healthcare? In total, 2984 papers were imported for screening, and, following the removal of duplicates and screening, 21 papers were included in the scoping review. The findings suggest that child-centred care is an emerging, ambiguous poorly defined concept; no clear consensus exists about what constitutes child-centred care. Although it seems antithetical to argue against child-centred care, little robust evidence was identified that demonstrates the impact and benefit of child-centred care. If child-centred care is to be a sustainable, convincing model to guide practice and compete with other models of care, it needs to establish robust evidence of its effectiveness, the impact on children and their families, as well as the wider impacts on the healthcare system.