A 2‐year dyadic longitudinal study of mothers' and fathers' marital adjustment when caring for a child with cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Studies examining interrelationships within parental couples confronted with pediatric cancer are scarce. This study explored dyadic longitudinal associations between both partners' family functioning and mood at diagnosis, and marital adjustment 2 years later. METHOD: Parents of children (n = 47 couples) with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) completed the Family Well-Being Assessment and Profile of Mood States-Bipolar Form at diagnosis, and the Locke-Wallace Marital Adjustment Test 2 years post diagnosis. Multilevel linear models using the actor-partner interdependence model (APIM) and controlling for baseline marital adjustment were conducted to evaluate within subject and dyadic longitudinal effects. RESULTS: For mothers, better marital adjustment 2 years post diagnosis was associated with perception of greater family support and less role conflict and role overload at diagnosis. For fathers, better marital adjustment 2 years post-diagnosis was associated with perception of less role conflict, greater role ambiguity, and being more tired at diagnosis, as well as their partner's perception of less role conflict at diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight the importance of considering both partners' perspectives in understanding marital adjustment across treatment phases in parents of children with ALL. Early interventions for couples should be tailored to meet each partner's needs in order to foster resilience within the couple.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".