MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1979343768 · doi:10.1177/1043454207304907

Understanding the Supportive Care Needs of Parents of Children With Cancer: An Approach to Local Needs Assessment

2007· article· en· W1979343768 on OpenAlexaffabout
Laura Kerr, Margaret B. Harrison, Jennifer Medves, Joan Tranmer, Margaret I. Fitch

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pediatric Oncology Nursing · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science CentreQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeeds assessmentPerspective (graphical)Exploratory researchConceptual frameworkNursingSpecial needsPsychologyChildhood cancerMedicineCancerPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this study was to conduct an assessment of supportive care needs from the perspective of parents of children diagnosed with cancer within an urban-rural region in Eastern Ontario, Canada. Guided by a conceptual framework for supportive care, the exploratory, mixed-method study used a standard needs survey and semistructured interviews. Fifteen parents completed (75% response rate) the survey, and 3 parents participated as key informants in the follow-up interview. Parents reported needs in all 6 of the need categories outlined within the Supportive Care Needs Framework. The proportion of parents expressing a need ranged from 23% to 39%. Dealing with the fear of their child's cancer spreading was frequently identified by parents. Emotional and informational needs were the 2 most frequently acknowledged categories of need. With further refinement, the use of the conceptual framework will provide a methodology for planning care based on the individual needs identified by parents of children with cancer.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.312
Threshold uncertainty score0.633

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.326 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations88
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pediatric Oncology NursingSame topicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207