Elaboration and refinement of a motivational communication training program for healthcare professionals in pediatric oncology: a feasibility and acceptability study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction A healthy lifestyle could have a positive impact in reducing the incidence of some long-term sequelae secondary to pediatric cancer treatments. Motivational communication (MC) is effective at improving healthy lifestyle habits, especially when patients experience change as a challenge. To date, there is no available intervention program using MC that promotes healthy lifestyles in pediatric oncology.Objectives The aim of this study was to develop the first MC training program for professionals in pediatric oncology and assess its feasibility and acceptability.Materials and methods Following standard procedures involving professionals, we developed a professional-targeted training named the Motivation Cafés, consisting in six sessions of core MC skills for healthcare professionals who wish to positively impact lifestyles of families in pediatric oncology. We used a mixed-methods quantitative-qualitative study to assess the program feasibility and acceptability. Professionals in nutrition and physical activity (N = 16) attended two rounds of the training and completed surveys to evaluate the training. They reported self-efficacy and knowledge in MC. Participation and retention rates were used to assess acceptability and feasibility, and a thematic analysis of the open-ended questions was performed to identify strengths and weaknesses of the program to further refine the program. We used non-parametric statistics to compare pre-post changes on measures of self-efficacy and knowledge in MC.Results Attendance and retention (average 4.2/6 sessions completed) were high, suggesting very good adherence and feasibility. We also found high levels of acceptability and pertinence of the program (i.e. >90%). The results suggested probable improvements in self-efficacy and knowledge, but these were not statistically significant given the limited sample size.Conclusion The training Motivation Cafés is now ready to be pilot tested in pediatric cancer care centers.
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 | 0.026 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".