Observational Assessment of Family Functioning at Mealtime in Preschool Children With Cystic Fibrosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine functioning during a dinner meal in families of a child with a chronic illness that requires dietary treatment recommendations, as compared to families of a child without a chronic illness. METHODS: Ratings of seven dimensions of family functioning on the McMaster Mealtime Family Interaction Coding System (MICS) were obtained on 29 families of children with CF and 29 families of children with no chronic illness, ages 2 to 6 years, during a videotaped dinner meal at home. RESULTS: Ratings of families with a child with CF were significantly lower than those for families of children without a chronic illness on Overall Family Functioning and five of the six MICS dimensions: Communication, Interpersonal Involvement, Affect Management, Behavior Control, and Role Allocation and approached significance on the Task Accomplishment dimension. The ratings of families of a child with CF were in the "clinically significant" range on all subcales, including Task ACCOMPLISHMENT. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that family functioning at mealtimes may be different in families of children with CF in which explicit dietary guidelines exist than in families of children with no illness or dietary guidelines. These results are discussed in terms of global family functioning and treatment approaches to dietary treatment recommendations.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".