Parents’ Experiences and Information Needs While Caring for a Child With Functional Constipation: A Systematic Review
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pediatric functional constipation (FC) reportedly affects at least 1 in 10 children worldwide. Parent and family education is a key component for successful treatment, yet there is little research exploring what information families need and how to best support them. The aim of this review is to synthesize current evidence on the experiences and information needs of parents caring for a child with FC. We systematically searched published research and completed screening against a priori inclusion criteria. Thirteen studies (n = 10 quantitative, n = 3 qualitative) were included. We found 2 main themes, precarious footing and profound and pervasive effects. Heavy caregiving burdens fueled doubts, misinformation, relationship breakdown, and treatment deviation. In light of clinical recommendations, our findings reveal a potential mismatch between parents' needs and care provision for FC. It is likely that both parents and health care providers would benefit from resources and interventions to improve care related to pediatric FC.
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.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it