Parents' journey through treatment for their child's obesity: a qualitative study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Treatment for childhood obesity is characterised by patient non-attendance and drop-out, and widespread failure to achieve weight maintenance. Qualitative methods may improve our understanding of patient perceptions and so improve treatment for childhood obesity. AIM: To provide insight into the perceptions of parents of obese children as they "journey" from pre-treatment to end of treatment. METHODS: We used purposive sampling and studied 17 parents of children (mean (SD) age 8.4 (2.1) years) attending 6-month outpatient treatments for obesity (BMI>98th percentile). Parent's perceptions were explored by in-depth interviews, analysed using Framework methods. RESULTS: Parents were characterised as being unaware of their child's weight, in denial or actively seeking treatment. Parents were consistently motivated to enter treatment due to perceived benefits to their child's self-esteem or quality of life, and weight outcomes appeared typically less important. During treatment parents felt there was a lack of support for lifestyle changes outside the clinic, and noted that members of the extended family often undermined or failed to support lifestyle changes. Parents generally felt that treatment should have continued beyond 6 months and that it had provided benefits to their child's well-being, self-esteem and quality of life, and this is what motivated many to remain engaged with treatment. DISCUSSION: This study may help inform future treatments for childhood obesity by providing insights into the aspects of treatment of greatest importance to parents. Future treatments may need to consider providing greater support for lifestyle changes within the extended family, and may need to focus more on psycho-social outcomes.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 it