The experience of hope in families of children and adolescents living with chronic illness: A thematic synthesis of qualitative studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To synthesize qualitative studies on the experience of hope in families of children and adolescents living with chronic illness. BACKGROUND: Hope is multidimensional, dynamic, and varies according to experienced events, cultural environments and stage of life. The qualitative synthesis of the experience of hope in the paediatric population with chronic conditions is scarce. DESIGN: Thematic synthesis of qualitative studies. DATA SOURCES: A systematic literature search in PubMed, CINAHL, LILACS, PsycINFO, Scopus, and Web of Science was performed supplemented by manual search strategies. Thirty-one studies from fifteen countries, published between 1981-2018, were included. FINDINGS: Findings were integrated into an analytical theme "FAMILY HOPE: KEEPING THE DAY-TO-DAY BALANCE", encompassing the following five descriptive themes: Uncertainty; Support; Information; Between "dark thoughts" and positive thoughts; and Hoping to go back to normality. CONCLUSION: This thematic synthesis brings a new dimension of hope among families of children and adolescents living with chronic illness. "Family Hope" highlights the influence of the relationships between relatives and the chronically ill child in the balance of hope. It is recommended that health professionals use a family-focused approach to support these families. IMPACT: Shifting the focus to a family dimension of hope is a promising pursuit that has the potential to inform future nursing practices to support the experiences of families living with chronic illness in the paediatric context. A better understanding of the role and characteristics of family hope will promote the development of more effective interventions for families to adapt to long-term paediatric conditions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.053 | 0.068 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".