MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Pediatric sibling donor bone marrow transplant: Assessing distress in donors and family members

2009· article· en· W2279886967 on OpenAlexaff
Pamela S. Hinds, Wendy Pelletier, Melissa A. Alderfer, Stella M. Davies, Rebecca D. Pentz

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSiblingMedicineDistressCoping (psychology)Grounded theoryQualitative researchBone marrow transplantBone marrow transplantationClinical psychologyFamily medicineTransplantationDevelopmental psychologyPsychologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

e20625 Background: When a child is diagnosed with cancer, the entire family is affected. In qualitative studies, 28–81% of siblings of children with cancer display behavioral maladjustment. Quantitative studies show similar findings, documenting up to a three-fold increase in clinically significant behavioral problems among siblings of children with cancer. Methods: In order to better understand sibling distress we conducted 3–4 interviews using grounded theory methodology (a qualitative strategy to explore common themes and develop theory) with each family member over 9 years old of 7 families with a child undergoing a sibling donor bone marrow transplant for cancer or sickle cell anemia. Participants also completed standardized scales related to coping. Results: Of the 29 subjects interviewed, 6 were African American, 4 Hispanic and 19 white. Six parents had at least a college degree and income was evenly distributed from $5,000 to >$80,000 a year. Children, including 4 patients, 6 donor siblings and 5 other siblings, ranged in age from 9 to 18. Based on the grounded theory analysis of each interview, we theorize that siblings experience less distress if the parents share the patient care giving. Our data support this hypothesis, with analysis of interviews indicating improved coping in families that shared care giving for the transplant recipient, and increased distress in families in which all the patient care giving was performed by the mother, a commonly used strategy. Conclusion: In order to potentially facilitate increased family functioning and decrease caregiver burden, parents should be encouraged to share care giving when feasible. Our study shows that systematic interviews can explore the family experience of pediatric transplantation and allow development of improved support systems for families of children undergoing sibling donor bone marrow transplantation. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.455
Teacher spread0.354 · 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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life→French-language works237,207→