MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3088949273 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2019-033403

Understanding families’ experiences following a diagnosis of non-syndromic craniosynostosis: a qualitative study

2020· article· en· W3088949273 on OpenAlexaff
Victoria Kuta, Lauren Curry, Daniel McNeely, Simon Walling, Jill Chorney, Michael Bezuhly

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCraniofacial Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsIzaak Walton Killam Health CentreDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCraniosynostosisQualitative researchThematic analysisPsychosocialAnxietyFamily medicineNursingPediatricsPsychiatrySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Craniosynostosis is typically diagnosed and surgically corrected within the first year of life. The diagnosis and surgical correction of the condition can be a very stressful experience for families. Despite this, there is little research exploring the impact that craniosynostosis has on families, especially in the period immediately following diagnosis and correction. In this study, the authors aimed to qualitatively examine the psychosocial experience of families with a child diagnosed with craniosynostosis. DESIGN: Qualitative study. SETTING: Tertiary care paediatric health centre. PARTICIPANTS: Mothers of children newly diagnosed with single-suture, non-syndromic craniosynostosis. INTERVENTION: Semistructured interviews regarding parental experience with the initial diagnosis, their decision on corrective surgery for their child, the operative experience, the impact of craniosynostosis on the family and the challenges they encountered throughout their journey. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Thematic analysis, a type of qualitative analysis that provides an in-depth account of participant's experiences, was used to analyse the interview data. RESULTS: Over a 4-year period, 12 families meeting eligibility criteria completed the study. Three main themes (six subthemes) emerged from the preoperative interviews: frustration with diagnostic delays (parental intuition and advocacy, hope for improved awareness), understanding what to expect (healthcare supports, interest in connecting with other families) and justifying the need for corrective surgery (influence of the surgeon, struggle with cosmetic indications). Two main themes (four subthemes) were drawn from the postoperative interviews: overcoming fear (the role of healthcare professionals, transition home) and relief (reduction in parental anxiety, cosmetic improvements). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the diagnosis of craniosynostosis has a profound impact on families, leading them to face many struggles throughout their journey. A better understanding of these experiences will help to inform future practice, with a hope to improve this experience for other families moving forward.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.074

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0110.008
Scholarly communication0.0040.006
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.165
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.264 · 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ OpenSame topicCraniofacial Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207