Gender‐specific differences in the psychosocial adjustment of parents of a child with duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) ‐ Two points of view for a shared experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research was conducted on parents’ experience of caring for a child living with Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD). The focus of this research was on the key psychological aspects of the process of adjustment to the illness of their child (family and spousal relationship, daily life, emotions, career, spirituality, and coping strategies). There was evidence throughout the study of gender‐specific differences in constructing the different aspects of the shared experience. The main findings included major differences in the initial reaction and coping styles between mothers and fathers. These differences could be perceived as a threat or could serve as a source of isolation between parents. Additional findings included the unequal sharing of caregiving tasks between partners: the primary caregiving role usually being assumed by the mother, with the father playing a supportive role. The unique contribution of this study in further describing the lived experience of parents of a child with DMD is its attention to the internal dynamic of the relationship between mothers and fathers. This dynamic is highly dependent on the respective roles of primary and secondary caregiver. This research has implications for the design and implementation of intervention strategies aimed at couples caring for a child with DMD, or with other severe, chronic, and uniformly fatal illnesses.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".