Automated Parent-Training for Preschooler Immunization Pain Relief: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine a computerized parent training program, "Bear Essentials," to improve parents' knowledge and coaching to help relieve preschoolers' immunization distress. METHOD: In a randomized controlled trial, 90 parent-child dyads received Bear Essentials parent training plus distraction, distraction only, or control. Outcomes were parent knowledge, parent and child behavior, and child pain. RESULTS: Bear Essentials resulted in improved knowledge of the effects of parents' reassurance, provision of information, and apologizing on children's procedural distress. Trained parents also engaged in less reassurance and more distraction and encouragement of deep breathing. Children in Bear Essentials engaged in more distraction and deep breathing than children in other groups. There were no effects on measures of child distress or pain. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that the interactive computer training program impacted parent knowledge, parent behavior, and child behavior as hypothesized, but modifications will be necessary to have more robust outcomes on child procedural distress.
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 | 0.019 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".