Parenting children with diabetes and Belsky's Determinants of Parenting Model: literature review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: This paper provides a critical appraisal of the parenting literature as related to children with diabetes and proposes an adapted model of Belsky's Determinants of Parenting. BACKGROUND: Diabetes is the leading endocrine disease in school-aged children. As primary healthcare providers, parents assume responsibility for the daily management of their children's diabetes. It is therefore inevitable that parenting becomes a crucial variable in determining diabetes control. However, the literature examining parenting children with a chronic illness such as diabetes is limited. METHOD: A literature search was conducted using the CINAHL, EMBASE, PsychINFO, and Social Science Index databases and the terms 'parenting', 'determinants of parenting', 'Belsky's Determinants of Parenting' and combined with 'children' and 'type 1 diabetes'. Parenting and nursing literature from 1984 to 2004 was included if it was related to parenting determinants and diabetes control in children. The literature retrieved was critically appraised and synthesized in relation to Belsky's Determinants of Parenting Model. FINDINGS: By incorporating new knowledge, an adapted Determinants of Parenting Model is proposed. The adapted model reflects a bi-directional relationship between parenting and child characteristics. Specifically, suggestions for future research on the adapted model and the bi-directional relationship between parenting and child characteristics are also discussed. CONCLUSION: Recommendations are presented for use of the adapted Determinants of Parenting Model for future nursing research. Future research will need to focus on establishing causal links between the determinants, identifying the extent to which each determinant influences parenting, and parenting determinants questionnaire development.
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 | 0.007 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.017 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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".