Parents’ information needs and preferences related to bronchiolitis: a qualitative study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Bronchiolitis affects more than one-third of children less than age 2 years and can cause substantial anxiety for parents, leading them to seek information on how to care for their sick child. The aim of our qualitative study was to explore the information needs and preferences of parents caring for a child with bronchiolitis. METHODS: We used a qualitative descriptive approach. Participants were recruited by means of purposive sampling from Oct. 1, 2017, to Mar. 15, 2018 from the Stollery Children's Hospital emergency department, a specialized pediatric emergency department in Edmonton. Individual semistructured interviews were conducted. RESULTS: Fifty-three parents were recruited to participate, of whom 30 could not be reached after 4 contact attempts and 8 refused. Thus, 15 parents participated (16 children). Three major themes were identified: 1) parents' information needs about bronchiolitis, 2) parents' preferred information sources and 3) parents' preferred information delivery formats. Participants indicated that they want and require credible, easy-to-understand information about bronchiolitis in a variety of formats, and especially valued information obtained directly from a health care professional or an evidence-based website. INTERPRETATION: This study provides important information about parents' information needs concerning bronchiolitis in children. Identifying the information that parents want and value in relation to acute pediatric illnesses is imperative to developing innovative educational approaches for parents that reflect patient-centred 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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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".