Quantitative and qualitative testing of DARWeb: An online self-guided intervention for children with functional abdominal pain and their parents
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The main objective of this study was to preliminary explore the effects of DARWeb on different outcomes. A Quasi-experimental, one-group, pretest-posttest design was used. Parents and children were asked to complete questionnaires and questions (separately) about quality of life, abdominal pain severity, and satisfaction. Semi-structured interviews with families were also performed. This study focuses on 17 families. Results showed that parent's ratings of children's abdominal pain severity were significantly lower after finishing the intervention and at the 3-month follow-up, and quality of life scores had increased significantly after 3 months. From children's ratings, mean abdominal pain severity scores were significantly lower after the intervention compared to the preintervention assessment. Both parents and children were quite satisfied with the intervention. In qualitative interviews, families suggested that DARWeb helped them to give less importance to pain and to learn coping strategies. In conclusion, this study showed the potential usefulness of DARWeb for children with functional abdominal pain and for their parents.
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.
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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 it