The role of emotional social support in the psychological adjustment of siblings of children with cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Siblings of children with cancer are at risk for reduced emotional support. The role of emotional social support in the psychological adjustment of siblings of paediatric cancer patients was examined, in the context of age and gender. METHODS: The sample consisted of two groups of siblings of children being treated for cancer: siblings referred for behaviour problems (n = 47) and a comparison group of non-referred siblings (n = 25). Forty-two were female, and 30 were male. The mean age was 10.31 years (SD = 2.71). Siblings completed measures of depression, anxiety, behaviour, and emotional social support. One parent of each sibling completed measures of sibling's behaviour and anxiety. RESULTS: Siblings who reported more social support endorsed significantly fewer symptoms of depression, anxiety, and fewer behaviour problems, and their parents reported less anxiety and fewer behaviour problems than siblings who reported lower social support. Parents of referred siblings reported significantly more behaviour problems than parents of non-referred siblings. Referred adolescent females reported significantly higher depression scores and were perceived as more anxious than referred adolescent males and non-referred adolescent females. Non-referred younger siblings with high social support were perceived by their parents as having the fewest behaviour problems. CONCLUSIONS: High level of social support appears to play a protective role in psychological adjustment of siblings of paediatric cancer patients, with age and gender as modifying factors. Although not all siblings develop behaviour or emotional problems, it is critical to identify those who do in order to intervene accordingly.
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 | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".