Parental Satisfaction With an Early Family Intervention Program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to evaluate parental satisfaction with a family intervention program. The program provides help and support for parents with newborns who have specific health problems (e.g., cleft palate and/or lip; Down syndrome). Four family subscales, personal (emotional and cognitive), marital, parental, and extended family and others, were examined. The majority of parents were satisfied with the intervention. Most felt that the intervention had helped them to adapt to the unexpected situation. They received guidance in discerning and discussing their own emotions and those of their partner or spouse, and the help they received gave them confidence about the care their child would receive. Results revealed significant differences in satisfaction levels (depending on the sex of the parent), the child's diagnosis, and annual income. Mothers of newborns with Down syndrome were more satisfied than fathers with the personal-emotional support they received. Low-income families were more satisfied than those with higher incomes for all subscales. On the parental subscale, those whose child had a cleft lip/palate were more satisfied than those whose child had Down syndrome. The results raised several important questions about this type of early intervention program, which will require further in-depth investigation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".