MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2609643061 · doi:10.1177/1043454217703594

The Experiences of Parents of Pediatric Patients With Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia, 2 Months After Completion of Treatment

2017· article· en· W2609643061 on OpenAlexaff
Barbara Muskat, Heather Jones, Sonia Lucchetta, Wendy Shama, Sue Zupanec, Andrea Greenblatt

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pediatric Oncology Nursing · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsApprehensionMedicineFeelingPediatric cancerLymphoblastic LeukemiaQualitative researchFamily medicineAcute lymphocytic leukemiaLeukemiaCancerPediatricsPsychologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Diagnosis and treatment of childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) can be a highly stressful time for the entire family. While completion of treatment may bring relief to some families, it may also bring about additional anxieties and fear. The primary objective of this article is to present an analysis of the experiences, emotional states, and support needs of parents of pediatric cancer patients 2 months after treatment completion for ALL. Using a qualitative interpretive description approach, transcripts from interviews with 17 parents from the leukemia/lymphoma program of a large urban pediatric cancer center were analyzed using N-Vivo 10 data analysis software. Parents reported simultaneous feelings of relief and apprehension, changing relationships with their health care team and the experience of returning to a life following treatment. Results highlight the need for support for parents on completion of treatment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.312 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations39
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pediatric Oncology NursingSame topicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207