MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2797429922 · doi:10.1515/jpem-2018-0056

Impact of childhood type 1 diabetes on maternal work-family relations

2018· article· en· W2797429922 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Shlomit Shalitin, Efrat Hershtik, Moshe Phillip, M Yackobovich Gavan, Rachel Gali Cinamon

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pediatric Endocrinology and Metabolism · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBayer Canada
KeywordsMedicineScale (ratio)FacilitationClinical psychologyFamily medicinePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to evaluate work-family conflict (WFC) and work-family facilitation (WFF) of working mothers of children with type 1 diabetes (T1D) compared with those of working mothers of children under follow-up not requiring treatment and of healthy children, and to explore the impact of organizational resources and the characteristics of the child and his disease on this interface. METHODS: The study included 157 working mothers: 50 mothers of children with T1D, 50 mothers of children on medical follow-up without chronic illness and 57 mothers of healthy children. The participants completed validated questionnaires including the WFC scale, WFF scale, organizational resources support scale, life and work satisfaction questionnaire, a background demographic questionnaire and a child health questionnaire. Mothers of children with T1D also completed a questionnaire relating to diabetes management. RESULTS: Almost half of the mothers of children with T1D found it necessary to reduce their working hours or to change their workplace. This group also reported a significantly higher level of colleague support. There were no significant differences in WFC and WFF between mothers of children with T1D and controls. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the effect of raising a T1D child on the mother's vocational behavior. Despite the additional burden, work is a source of enrichment for these mothers.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.302

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations55
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pediatric Endocrinology and MetabolismSame topicDiabetes Management and ResearchFrench-language works237,207