The needs of siblings of children with a life-threatening illness, part 1: Conceptualization and development of a measure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The presence of a child afflicted with a life-threatening illness is a difficult situation for the child's siblings, especially when their own needs are left unmet. The present article describes the first three phases of research involved in the conceptualization, development, and content validation of an initial version of the Inventaire des Besoins de la Fratrie d'Enfants Malades Sévèrement (IBesFEMS) [Needs Inventory for Siblings of Critically ill Children]. METHOD: The first phase of the development of this instrument was conducted using qualitative methodology (focus groups: 6 siblings, 8 parents). The second phase consisted of validating the content of a pool of items developed according to the needs identified in the first phase. Some 21 participants (3 psychometricians, 3 researchers, 9 clinicians, and 6 siblings) evaluated each item for relevance and clarity. Finally, during the third phase, the acceptability and administration procedures of the preliminary version of the instrument were assessed qualitatively by five siblings. RESULTS: The first phase led to production of a typology made up of 43 needs in 10 different environments. The second phase allowed for selection of the items that were clearest and most relevant, based on expert opinion. This procedure gave rise to a first version of the IBesFEMS, which consisted of 48 items. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: The IBesFEMS appears to be a promising tool for specifically assessing the needs of the adolescent siblings of seriously ill children.
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 | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".