MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2196597752 · doi:10.1188/16.onf.48-56

Psychological Functioning, Post-Traumatic Growth, and Coping in Parents and Siblings of Adolescent Cancer Survivors

2016· article· en· W2196597752 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Andrea M. Turner-Sack, Rosanne Menna, Sarah R. Setchell, Cathy Maan, Danielle Cataudella

Bibliographic record

VenueOncology nursing forum · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WindsorUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineChildhood cancerCoping (psychology)PopulationCancerClinical psychologyDemographyGerontologyEnvironmental healthInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES: To examine psychological functioning, post-traumatic growth (PTG), coping, and cancer-related characteristics of adolescent cancer survivors' parents and siblings. . DESIGN: Descriptive, correlational. . SETTING: Children's Hospital of Western Ontario in London, Ontario, Canada. . SAMPLE: Adolescents who finished cancer treatment 2-10 years prior (n = 31), as well as their parents (n = 30) and siblings (n = 18). . METHODS: Participants completed self-report measures of psychological distress, PTG, life satisfaction, coping, and cancer-related characteristics. . MAIN RESEARCH VARIABLES: Psychological functioning, PTG, and coping. . FINDINGS: Parents' and siblings' PTG levels were similar to survivors' PTG levels; however, parents reported higher PTG than siblings. Parents who used less avoidant coping, were younger, and had higher life satisfaction experienced less psychological distress. Parents whose survivor children used more active coping reported less psychological distress. Siblings who were older used more active coping, and the longer it had been since their brother or sister was diagnosed, the less avoidant coping they used. . CONCLUSIONS: Childhood and adolescent cancer affects survivors' siblings and parents in unique ways. . IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: Relationship to the survivor, use of coping strategies, life satisfaction, and time since diagnosis affect family members' postcancer experiences.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.335 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations47
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOncology nursing forumSame topicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207