MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract 16905: Parental Vigilance in Caring for Their Children with Hypoplastic Left Heart Syndrome

2011· article· en· W194373977 on OpenAlexaff
Leanne Meakins, Lynne Ray, Kathleen Hegadoran, Gwen R. Rempel

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Heart Disease Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaStollery Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHypoplastic left heart syndromeVigilance (psychology)PediatricsCardiologyInternal medicineHeart disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hypoplastic left heart syndrome (HLHS) is a complex heart malformation that requires life-saving treatment within the first days of life if the child is to survive. Parents experience numerous challenges as they learn to parent a child with complex care requirements and to deal with the consequences of such intensive parenting on themselves as parents. The research question guiding this study was: Is the parenting process among parents of a child with HLHS characterized by exaggerated vigilant parental action and if so, how does this influence parental response? This research was undertaken within a program of qualitative research in which 2 studies involved parents of children with HLHS, one cohort having undergone the classic Norwood approach and the other cohort the Sano approach. Interview data from both studies underwent a secondary thematic content analysis based on the sensitizing concepts of uncertainty, protectiveness, support, and mastery of complex care. Transcribed data from 55 interviews with parents (24 mothers and 17 fathers) of young children (2 months to 5 years of age) with HLHS were analyzed for relevant and recurring themes. In mastering skills required to care for their child with HLHS, parents focused on what was in their hands , in contrast to what was out of their hands. Vigilant parental actions were evident as parents became skilled at providing complex care and protecting their child. Parents recounted when they were excessive in their vigilant actions and acknowledged that these actions were situation appropriate at times and other times exaggerated. Knowledge of vigilant and exaggerated vigilant parental actions in response to their child's complex care has implications for health care providers who provide education and support for the parents of these children. Long term follow-up, both clinically and through research is needed to assess the long term consequences of exaggerated vigilant parental action on the child, parent and family and to determine and evaluate appropriate and timely intervention.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.222 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicCongenital Heart Disease Studies→French-language works237,207→