BackgroundEffective communication is founded on bidirectional participation from families and healthcare providers. In adult medicine, bidirectional communication promotes treatment adherence and builds the family–provider relationship. However, the relationship between communication styles in pediatrics remains poorly understood, particularly in culturally diverse settings. This study aims to investigate parent–provider communication dynamics and parental involvement during diagnostic cancer communication in Guatemala.ProcedureThis qualitative study included 20 families of children with cancer and 10 providers at Unidad Nacional de Oncología Pediátrica in Guatemala. Psychoeducation and diagnostic conversations between parents, psychologists, and oncologists were recorded and thematically analyzed using a priori and novel codes exploring communication behaviors, parental engagement, and interpersonal dynamics.ResultsParticipating parents had children with various diagnoses. Only 15% of fathers and 5% of mothers reported education beyond primary school. Providers spoke 68% of words during psychoeducation and 85% of words during diagnosis conversations. Providers used supportive communication behaviors providing explanations, demonstrating verbal attentiveness, and soliciting questions and non‐supportive behaviors including paternalistic talk. Parental participation was considered active when they asked questions, expressed hopes or concerns, or asserted their opinions, and non‐active when participation was limited to brief responses to closed‐ended questions. Supportive provider communication often encouraged active participation; non‐supportive communication did not. Furthermore, active parental participation prompted supportive communication from providers, while non‐active participation did not.ConclusionsOur findings highlight the bidirectional nature of effective communication, establishing that provider communication styles both influence and are influenced by parental participation, and emphasizing the importance of supportive provider communication for patient‐centered care.
