Advanced Knowledge in Nursing Practice Can Make the Difference: The Value of a Nursing Intervention for Families of Children with Rare Chronic Illnesses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this pilot nursing intervention study was to measure the benefit of one short term family therapeutic conversation, which is based on the Calgary family assessment- and interventions models. Parents of children with rare chronic illnesses such as epilepsy, IgA deficiency and arthritis were invited to participate. Quasi-experimental pretest/posttest design was conducted to explore the impact for parents of one short term therapeutic conversation. Participants were 30 parents of 30 children with rare chronic illnesses; 15 parents in the experimental group (EG) and 15 in the control group (CG). Parents in both groups answered a questionnaire, on perceived family support both before the nursing intervention and again 3–5 days later after the intervention. Data was analysed using Chi-square and independent sample t-test. Main findings indicated significant difference between the groups. Parents of children with epilepsy, arthritis and IgA deficiency, perceived significantly more support after the intervention than parents of children with the same diseases who received treatment as usual (TAU). These research findings emphasize the benefit of the short term therapautic conversation intervention for families of children with rare chronic illnesses.
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 | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".