Weighty Conversations: Caregivers', Children's, and Clinicians' Perspectives and Experiences of Discussing Weight‐Related Topics in Healthcare Consultations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) are at a higher risk of having obesity than their typically developing peers. Although it has been recommended that health care providers (HCPs) speak to caregivers and children about the risk of higher weights, no research has examined how HCPs communicate weight-related information. Furthermore, there is a dearth of evidence regarding how to approach and deliver optimal weight-related discussions among children with ASD and their caregivers. Given these knowledge gaps, 21 in-depth interviews were conducted with children with ASD, their caregivers, and HCPs. Using a qualitative analytic approach, data from interviews were analyzed thematically. Results suggest that HCPs at times projected weight stigma during clinical encounters, which did not motivate children and caregivers to work toward work loss or wellness. HCPs also described reticence in engaging families in weight-related conversations due to limited training, and lack of clinical tools to guide these conversations. All stakeholders identified a need to work together to establish a therapeutic partnership to discuss weight-related issues without blame or shame. The combination of strength-based communication approaches, establishing a strong therapeutic partnership, and development of clinical tools facilitating weight-related discussions for HCPs outlined in this article are potential vehicles to foster successful weight-related discussions while promoting lifelong wellness. Autism Research 2018, 11: 1500-1510. © 2018 International Society for Autism Research, Wiley Periodicals, Inc. LAY SUMMARY: Children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) are at a higher risk of having obesity. Yet, it is unknown how healthcare providers (HCPs) should deliver weight-related information. Findings suggest children and caregivers experienced weight stigma and were uncomfortable discussing weight-related issues. HCPs identified that they did not have sufficient training, and did not feel confident identifying/addressing weight issues. Tools are needed to facilitate weight-related discussions among children, caregivers and HCPs.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".