Parental experiences of a developmentally focused care program for infants and children during prolonged hospitalization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigates parental experiences and perceptions of the care received during their child's prolonged hospitalization. It relates this care to the Beanstalk Program (BP), a develop-mentally focused care program provided to these families within an acute care hospital setting. A total of 20 parents (of children hospitalized between 1-15 months) completed the Measures of Processes of Care (MPOC-20) with additional questions regarding the BP. Scores rate the extent of the health-care provider's behaviour as perceived by the family, ranging from 'to a great extent' (7) to 'never' (1). Parents rated Respectful and Supportive Care (6.33) as highest, while Providing General Information (5.65) was rated lowest. Eleven parents participated in a follow-up, qualitative, semi-structured interview. Interview data generated key themes: (a) parents strive for positive and normal experiences for their child within the hospital environment; (b) parents value the focus on child development in the midst of their child's complex medical care; and (c) appropriate developmentally focused education helps parents shift from feeling overwhelmed with a medically ill child to instilling feelings of confidence and empowerment to care for their child and transition home. These results emphasize the importance of enhancing child development for hospitalized infants and young children through programs such as the BP.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".