Best Practice in Provider/Parent Interaction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this 3-year prospective grounded theory study in three pediatric settings, we aimed to develop a conceptualization of best practice health care providers (BPHCPs) in interaction with parents of children with complex, chronic, life-threatening conditions. Analysis of semistructured interviews with 34 parents and 80 health care professionals (HCPs) and 88 observation periods of HCP/parent interactions indicated that BPHCPs shared a broad worldview; values of equity, family-centered care, and integrity; and a commitment to authentic engagement. BPHCPs engaged in direct care activities, in connecting behaviors, and in exquisitely attuning to particularities of the situation in the moment, resulting in positive outcomes for parents and HCPs. By focusing on what HCPs do well, findings showed that not only is it possible for HCPs to practice in this way, but those who do so are also recognized as being the best at what they do. We provide recommendations for practice and initial and ongoing professional education.
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 | 0.023 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
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".