The quality of life of home-ventilated children and their primary caregivers plus the associated social and economic burdens: a prospective study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite the obvious challenges faced by families caring for children on home ventilation, there is surprisingly little research into the details of their daily lives. In particular, little is known about the quality of life of the child and caregiver plus the associated social and economic burdens of care. METHODS: We prospectively studied 90 families enrolled in a paediatric home ventilation service in British Columbia. In the clinic, we recorded demographic information, patient acuity score and quality of life for patient and caregiver using standardised questionnaires. Parents then monitored social and financial costs of care at home over the subsequent 8 weeks. These data were collected by telephone at 1 and 2 months. RESULTS: Most children led rich active lives. Camping trips, wheelchair sports and foreign travel were the norm, not the exception. Over 90% assessed the burden of care as mild or moderate. Government support covers medical expenses and home nursing (median 32 h/week, IQR 0-62.5 h). Monthly unreimbursed family expenses were low (median $87.7, IQR $15.3-$472). Despite this, nearly 25% of primary caregivers assessed burden of care as severe and over 50% had chronic illnesses requiring daily medication (principally depression, anxiety and arthritis). Quality of life for children or caregivers did not correlate with income or education. INTERPRETATION: Home ventilation of complex children is a successful strategy but it places significant strain on the primary caregiver. Specific attention to the physical and mental health of the caregiver should be an integral part of the management of home-ventilated children. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01863992.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".