Short‐term changes in parents' resolution regarding their young child's diagnosis of cerebral palsy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe changes in parents' resolution regarding their young child's diagnosis of cerebral palsy over a period of 1 year, and to describe the changes in strategies of resolution. METHODS: In this longitudinal study, 38 parents of children with cerebral palsy (mean age 18.4 months, SD = 1.1 at baseline) were followed with the Reaction to Diagnosis Interview, assessing their personal reactions to their child's diagnosis (i.e. resolution status). Changes at main and subclassification level of the Reaction to Diagnosis Interview were investigated using a binominal test. RESULTS: Twenty-nine parents (76%) were found to be stable with respect to their main resolution status (i.e. 'resolved' or 'unresolved'), while 24% of the parents either had changed from 'unresolved' to 'resolved' or in the opposite way. Furthermore, of the 28 parents who were classified as 'resolved' at both times, 15 (54%) had changed at subclassification level with respect to the specific strategies used. CONCLUSION: Resolution at a main level of parental reactions to their child's diagnosis was predominantly stable. Most parents were classified as 'resolved' at both baseline and follow-up assessment. However, more detailed analyses at subclassification level showed that most parents with a 'resolved' main status showed changing patterns of resolution strategies to their child's diagnosis, suggesting that resolution is an ongoing process.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 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".