Predictors of Stress of Parents of a Child with Cancer: A Jordanian Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Most paediatric oncology studies agree that being parents of a child with cancer is an emotionally stressful event. Although an increasing number of studies have investigated psychological stress of parents of a child with cancer, few of these studies have included both parents or investigated the predictors of high stress levels for the mothers and the fathers. Moreover, studies published over the last few decades were limited to Western countries and have shown inconsistent findings about parental perceived stress whose children have cancer. This study explored differences in predictors of perceived stress between Jordanian mothers and fathers of children with cancer. METHODS: This study involved a survey of 300 couples parenting a child with cancer. Participants answered the Arabic version of the Perceived Stress Scale 10-items, demographic and characteristics check list questionnaires. The main aims were to measure perceived stress levels for mothers and fathers, explore the predictors associated with high perceived stress levels and make a comparison between them. FINDINGS: Mothers reported significantly higher stress levels than fathers (p<0.001), with a large effect size (0.30). Some of the factors associated with mothers and fathers high stress levels affected both parents whereas employment status affected only fathers' stress levels. CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate the need to work with the mothers and the fathers with a child with cancer in Jordan to recognise their psychological needs at the time of diagnosis and followed by on-going psychological support for both parents.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".