MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3017618610 · doi:10.1097/jpn.0000000000000466

Transitioning Into the Role of Mother Following the Birth of a Very Low-Birth-Weight Infant

2020· article· en· W3017618610 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Katherine Bright, Cynthia Mannion, Deborah White, Shelley Raffin Bouchal

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Perinatal & Neonatal Nursing · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfant Development and Preterm Care
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrounded theoryMedicineDevelopmental psychologyNeonatal intensive care unitLow birth weightQualitative researchCoping (psychology)PediatricsPsychologyClinical psychologyPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This qualitative grounded theory pilot study investigated the concerns and coping mechanisms of mothers of very low-birth-weight (VLBW; <1500 g) infants following discharge from the neonatal intensive care unit in Alberta, Canada. In-depth, semistructured, face-to-face, audio-recorded interviews were conducted with women of VLBW infants. Interviews lasting 75 to 90 minutes were transcribed verbatim and coded using grounded theory methodology. Data saturation and theoretical redundancy were achieved in interviews with 6 mothers of VLBW infants. The core variable of "reconstructing normal" emerged from the interview data. Women indicated that mothering a VLBW infant is an unfolding experience that is continuously being revised, creating a new sense of normal. The construct consists of 4 categories; mother-infant relationship, maternal development, maternal caregiving and role-reclaiming strategies, and infant developmental milestones. Findings from this study suggest that women found the transition into motherhood following the birth of a VLBW infant as a multidimensional and dynamic process. Further research is warranted to confirm these results and to further explore mothering issues with VLBW infants.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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 score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.078

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations7
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Perinatal & Neonatal NursingSame topicInfant Development and Preterm CareFrench-language works237,207