MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000918511 · doi:10.1097/ncc.0b013e3182365646

Changes in Siblings After the Death of a Child From Cancer

2011· article· en· W2000918511 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Terrah L. Foster, Mary Jo Gilmer, Kathryn Vannatta, Maru Barrera, Betty Davies, Mary S. Dietrich, Diane L. Fairclough, Cynthia A. Gerhardt

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Nursing · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsSiblingBrotherMedicineSisterMcNemar's testDevelopmental psychologyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Few studies have examined changes in siblings after the death of a brother or sister, particularly from mother, father, and sibling perspectives within the first year after death. OBJECTIVE: This descriptive study identified and assessed the frequency of changes in siblings after a child's death from cancer. METHODS: Participants were recruited from cancer registries at 3 hospitals in the United States and Canada 3 to 12 months after the child's death. Thirty-six mothers, 24 fathers, and 39 siblings from 40 families were included. Semistructured interviews using open-ended questions were conducted with each parent and sibling separately in the home. Content analysis identified emerging themes, and the McNemar tests compared frequencies between each paired set of reports (sibling vs mother, sibling vs father, mother vs father). RESULTS: Sixty-nine percent of participants reported personal changes in siblings (eg, changes in personality, school work, goals/life perspective, activities/interests). Forty-seven percent noted changes in siblings' relationships with family members and peers. Only 21% of participants reported no changes attributed to the death. Comparisons of frequencies across informants were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: Most siblings experienced changes in multiple areas of their lives after the death of a brother or sister to cancer. Some changes reflected siblings that were positively adapting to the death, whereas other changes reflected difficulties. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Our findings offer guidance to improve aftercare for bereaved siblings and their families. Additional research is needed to further delineate the needs of bereaved siblings and to develop strategies to promote adaptation to loss.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 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

Citations80
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer NursingSame topicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207