MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2202914055 · doi:10.18357/ijih.102201515111

Supporting parents of Aboriginal children with asthma: Preferences and pilot interventions

2015· article· en· W2202914055 on OpenAlexfundvenueaboutno aff
Moira Stewart, Heather Castleden, Malcolm King, Nicole Letourneau, Jeffrey R. Masuda, Lisa Bourque Bearskin, Sharon Anderson, Roxanne Blood

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Indigenous Health · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFamily and Patient Care in Intensive Care Units
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsPsychological interventionCoping (psychology)Social supportParticipatory action researchFocus groupMedicinePsychologyIntervention (counseling)NursingFamily medicineClinical psychologySocial psychologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Asthma is one of the most common chronic conditions affecting Aboriginal children and adolescents in Canada, with associated high rates of hospitalization and emergency room visits. Social support deficits and social isolation pose significant problems for Aboriginal families coping with asthma challenges. However, support interventions that focus on the unique support needs of parents of Aboriginal children affected by asthma have not been investigated. Consequently, our study introduced support interventions to meet parents’ perceived support needs and intervention preferences. The study was conducted in urban and rural sites in three Canadian provinces. The interdisciplinary research team encompassed Aboriginal researchers and knowledge users, and the multimethod participatory research design was guided by Aboriginal community advisory committees. Diverse support interventions, designed to address the particular preferences and needs of parents in specific communities, were offered. Seventy-seven parents participated. These parents reported expanded support resources, increased support seeking, improved coping skills, and decreased support and education needs following the interventions, which were tailored to their unique needs. These participatory interventions were considered accessible, acceptable, relevant, and useful by parents.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.475

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.475
Teacher spread0.351 · 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.

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

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Indigenous HealthSame topicFamily and Patient Care in Intensive Care UnitsFrench-language works237,207