The Tyler Robinson Foundation: Providing Financial and Emotional Support for Pediatric Cancer Families
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Statement of the Problem: Families of children who are diagnosed with pediatric cancer are at a high risk of financial toxicity, which also causes an increase in emotional distress. Families must manage childcare, travel, and food during and after their children’s treatments. The stresses of these factors on top of the tragedy of dealing with a pediatric cancer diagnosis can be devastating to the financial and emotional well-being of a family. These families require financial and emotional support during and after a child’s treatment to attempt to reduce these stresses. Researchers have reported that 1/5 of cancer patients’ families reported losing more than 40% of their annual income due to work disruptions. Financial and emotional resources for families dealing with pediatric cancer beyond research are not as common as is required considering the need that exists. Methodology & Theoretical Orientation: The mission of The Tyler Robinson Foundation is to strengthen families financially and emotionally as they cope with the tragedy of a pediatric cancer diagnosis by offsetting out-of-pocket life expenses. We have provided financial resources in the form of grants and other programs to more than 1,500 families across the world, concentrating on the United States and Canada, since our founding in 2013. Interaction between staff and families also provide much needed emotional support. Our families have let us know that the financial relief that they receive have had positive effect on their families and the amount of focus that they can place on their children. Conclusion and Significance: The Tyler Robinson Foundation has assisted families for 7 years to focus on the care of their children during pediatric cancer treatment while reducing financial stresses, which in turn provides some relief for their emotional distress. We intend to continue in our mission and expand beyond our current reach.
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 | 0.007 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 0.004 |
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".