MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1984968214 · doi:10.4236/ojn.2012.24059

Loving her into well-being one day at a time: Narratives of caring for daughters with eating disorders

2012· article· en· W1984968214 on OpenAlexaff
Kathryn Weaver

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Journal of Nursing · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFamily and Disability Support Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransformational leadershipFeelingNarrativePsychologyDevelopmental psychologyMeaning (existential)Eating disordersNursingSocial psychologyPsychotherapistMedicineClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When a child is diagnosed with an eating disorder, parents are expected to help the child recover. Yet, parents often feel under-prepared and alone, their experiences inadequately known to healthcare professionals. The research aim was to examine the meaning to parents of caring for a child with an eating disorder. Qualitative interviews with 29 parents were analyzed and the parents’ experiences were represented by a collective story of loving her into well-being one day at a time which consisted of two themes: Running on nerves and caring through transformational activism. Running on nerves included threads of feeling lost, traumatized, scarred, and disengaged that mitigated as parents engaged in transformational activism processes directed toward helping themselves, their child, and other parents and children. The findings illustrate the importance of hearing parents’ stories in order to create supportive healing environments and to build capacity within families and health care systems.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0060.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.344 · 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

Citations7
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Journal of NursingSame topicFamily and Disability Support ResearchFrench-language works237,207