Siblings of Children With a Chronic Illness: A Meta-Analysis
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
OBJECTIVE: To review the literature pertaining to the siblings of children with a chronic illness. METHODS: Fifty-one published studies and 103 effect sizes were identified and examined through meta-analysis. RESULTS: We found (1) a modest, negative effect size statistic existed for siblings of children with a chronic illness relative to comparison participants or normative data; (2) heterogeneity existed for those effect sizes; (3) parent reports were more negative than child self-reports; (4) psychological functioning (i.e., depression, anxiety), peer activities, and cognitive development scores were lower for siblings of children with a chronic illness compared to controls; and (5) a cluster of chronic illnesses with daily treatment regimes was associated with negative effect statistics compared to chronic illnesses that did not affect daily functioning. CONCLUSIONS: More methodologically sound studies investigating the psychological functioning of siblings of children with a chronic illness are needed. Clinicians need to know that siblings of children with a chronic illness are at risk for negative psychological effects. Intervention programs for the siblings and families of children with a chronic illness should be developed.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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