MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Determinants of parental behaviour when children undergo day‐care surgery

2005· article· en· W2035365878 on OpenAlexaff
Jocelyne Tourigny, Claire Chapados, Raynald Pineault

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Nursing · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfant Development and Preterm Care
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSense of controlPsychologyGeneral partnershipHealth careFamily medicineNursingSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: This paper reports an investigation of the nature and strength of parental beliefs about their participation in their children's day-care surgery as well as demonstrated parental behaviours during the immediate post-recovery period. BACKGROUND: Parents want to participate in their children's hospital care but their behaviour does not reflect their intention. Parents' beliefs about their role in the hospital may be a factor influencing the way they help their children at the course of a day-care surgery. RESEARCH METHODS: A descriptive correlative design was used. French and English speaking parents of 3-12-year old children were asked to complete a self-administered questionnaire which comprised 42 items measuring the intensity of attitudes, norms and sense of control and their influence in predicting their intention to participate in hospital care. Parents' behaviours during the first hour following the child's return from the recovery room were video-recorded. RESULTS: A total of 220 parents participated in the study. Parental beliefs about participation in care were quite strong in terms of subjective norms, sense of control and attitude, predicting 64% of their intention to participate. Parents demonstrated mostly attitude type behaviours, while the level of demonstrated helping behaviours was somewhat low. CONCLUSIONS: Parents can be valuable partners in ambulatory care settings. Clinicians and health care managers should aim at establishing a true partnership with parents, in order to improve the quality of care given to children and their family in hospital and at home.

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)0.000
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 score0.253
Threshold uncertainty score0.499

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.281 · 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

Citations18
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced NursingSame topicInfant Development and Preterm CareFrench-language works237,207