MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164238355 · doi:10.1177/107484070000600103

Parents’ Perceptions of the Impact of a Telephone Support Group Intervention

2000· article· en· W2164238355 on OpenAlexaff
Judith A. Ritchie, Moira Stewart, Mary‐Lou Ellerton, Donna Thompson, Darlene Meade, Patty Weld Viscount

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Family Nursing · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFamily Support in Illness
Canadian institutionsGrace (Canada)Dalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial supportIntervention (counseling)Peer supportCoping (psychology)Randomized controlled trialQuality of life (healthcare)MedicineSupport groupPsychologyGerontologyClinical psychologyNursingSocial psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Parents living with a child or adolescent with a chronic condition experience wide-ranging demands and an increased risk of health problems. Their social support resources serve as a protective factor and can help to moderate the health effects of stressful situations associated with caregiving. This intervention study tested the impact of a 12-week telephone peer support group intervention for parents in a randomized trial. The support group parents described their experiences and perceptions of the impact of the intervention in weekly diaries and in interviews at three points over the 6 months following the intervention. Parents described increased social support, enhanced coping, increased sense of confidence, and changed outlook, family activities and relationships, and health care encounters. The vast majority were satisfied with the support groups. The telephone support groups tested in this study may improve the day-to-day quality of life for parents and diminish the risk of long-term negative health effects of caregiving.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.531
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.332 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations33
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Family NursingSame topicFamily Support in IllnessFrench-language works237,207