MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2910061185 · doi:10.1080/01612840.2018.1524531

Being Parent Caregivers for Adult Children with Schizophrenia

2019· article· en· W2910061185 on OpenAlexafffund
Lisa Young, Amanda Vandyk, Jean Daniel Jacob, Christine McPherson, Lisa Murata

Bibliographic record

VenueIssues in Mental Health Nursing · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFamily Caregiving in Mental Illness
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaRoyal Ottawa Mental Health Centre
FundersUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)PsychologyPsychiatryMedicineClinical psychologyDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Parent caregivers support the health and well-being of their adult children with schizophrenia. As a result, parent caregivers spend vast amounts of time providing care, which necessitates changes to their relationships and lives. In this qualitative study, the experiences of parent caregivers for adult children with schizophrenia were explored. Interpretive Description guided the study design, and data were collected through interviews with 12 English-speaking participants. Data were analyzed according to conventional content analysis. The themes "Uncertainty, Change, and Challenges" and "The Meaning of It All" help to articulate the participants' experiences. Overall, the participants reported tremendous distress in their roles. This was compounded by difficulties accessing and navigating the healthcare system and interactions with police. Effective strategies are needed to help parent caregivers cope within their role and gain access to timely and appropriate care.

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)0.007
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 score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.336 · 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

Citations16
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIssues in Mental Health NursingSame topicFamily Caregiving in Mental IllnessFrench-language works237,207