Perceptions of Healthy Lifestyles Among Children With Complex Heart Disease and Their Caregivers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Children with complex heart problems may be at higher risk for sedentary lifestyle morbidities than their healthy peers. This project examined perceptions, barriers, and supports that influence healthy active lifestyles among children with complex heart problems and their caregivers, to enable effective health and quality-of-life interventions. METHODS: Inductive thematic analysis was conducted of semi-structured guided discussions from 6 focus groups (young child [n = 2]; older child [n = 4]; parents of young child [n = 4]; parents of older child [n = 4]; pediatric cardiologist [n = 5]; pediatric cardiac nurse [n = 5]) and individual interviews with 7 parents, 5 parent/child dyads, 2 adults with complex heart problems, 6 pediatric cardiologists, 3 pediatric cardiac nurses, 4 pediatric cardiology mental health professionals, and 14 recreation professionals. RESULTS: Four interrelated themes were identified: (i) "It takes a village"-coordinated and collaborative interdisciplinary support; (ii) clear healthy lifestyle communication among children, families, and professionals is critically important; (iii) Ccreating supportive environments by building professional expertise; (iv) inspiring healthy lifestyles in the children's own environments. All groups identified a need to improve knowledge about childhood heart conditions among education and recreation professionals and to encourage effective communication between healthcare professionals and families. Participants indicated that these changes would support families, educators, and recreation professionals in engaging children with heart problems in healthy lifestyles in home, school, and community settings. CONCLUSIONS: Important healthy lifestyle barriers were identified within individuals and in their interactions. There is a profound need to enhance knowledge of childhood heart conditions and improve interactions among key stakeholders-children and families, educators, and recreation and healthcare professionals.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".