A systematic review on factors and consequences of parental distress as related to childhood cancer
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The literature including correlates of parental distress as related to childhood cancer is abundant. It is important to identify predictive factors and outcomes of this distress in parents. The objective of this review was to update previous syntheses on factors of distress and to identify outcomes of parents' distress in the recent literature (2007-2012). We performed a systematic review to identify all quantitative studies including measures of parental distress and associated factors during the study period. We found 56 eligible studies, of which 43 had a Low risk of bias (Cochrane guidelines). Forty-two reports included potential predictive factors. Significant relationships were found with clinical history of the child, sex of the parent, coping response and personal resources, pre-diagnosis family functioning, but not education/income or marital status. Twenty-five reports studied potential consequences of distress and focused on psychological adjustment in parents and children. Compared to past periods, a higher proportion of studies included fathers. Measures used to evaluate distress were also more homogeneous in certain domains of distress. This review underscores the need for appropriate methods for selecting participants and reporting results in future studies. Appropriate methods should be used to demonstrate causality between factors/consequences and distress.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it