Experiences of Canadian Parents of Young Children With Cleft Lip and/or Palate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Prior literature has described the perspectives of parents of young children with clip lip and/or palate; however, few studies have described parents' experiences within a Canadian health care system. This study aims to better understand the experiences of parents of young children with cleft lip and/or palate seen at a Canadian tertiary care center and identify their care needs. DESIGN: In-depth semistructured interviews. SETTING: Pediatric tertiary care center. PARTICIPANTS: Parents of children younger than 7 years of age with cleft lip and/or palate. RESULTS: From 14 interviews, 4 themes were identified. The diagnosis theme was associated with reactions, timing, and search for information. Key concerns within the theme of physiology and function were around feeding and speech. The health care experience theme included burden of care, peripheral hospitals and services, the cleft lip and palate clinic, and clinicians. The psychosocial theme included parents' reactions to their child's pain, coping strategies, family interactions, and school/day care experiences. Parents felt care could be improved by having: access to good information and community speech therapists, shorter appointment wait times, a peer support network, and increased cleft knowledge within their child's school and peer groups. CONCLUSIONS: The experience of parents of children with cleft lip and/or palate is complex but can be organized into 4 themes. Clinics may consider suggestions offered by parents to improve care. Future work should address parents' needs and aim to create a parent-reported quality-of-life measure specific to parents of young children with cleft lip and/or palate.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".