Mindfulness and Acceptance Interventions for Parents of Children and Adolescents Diagnosed with Chronic Medical Conditions: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Mindfulness and acceptance interventions (MAIs) have been identified as potentially beneficial for parents of children and adolescents diagnosed with chronic medical conditions. Objective: The objective of this review was to provide a descriptive summary of the existing literature on MAIs delivered to parents of children and adolescents diagnosed with chronic medical conditions. Data sources: Electronic searches were conducted by a Library Information Specialist familiar with the field by using EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EBM Reviews Databases, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Study eligibility, participants, and interventions: Peer-reviewed journal articles of MAIs delivered to parents of children and adolescents (birth to 18 years of age) diagnosed with a chronic medical condition were eligible for inclusion. Study appraisal and synthesis methods: A total of 18 studies involving 793 parents met inclusion criteria and thus were included in this review. The majority of studies were either pre/post design (n = 8) or randomized controlled trials (n = 6). Most interventions were delivered within a group (n = 6) or individually (n = 5). Nearly all studies (n = 14) reported statistically significant outcomes following the MAI intervention. Conclusions and implications of key findings: Descriptive information yielded from this review provides promising evidence that MAIs are being delivered to parents across the world and many researchers are using similar outcome measures when assessing the psychological flexibility, acceptance, and mindfulness skills following participation in MAIs among this population of parents.
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 | 0.005 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".