Exploring the Experiences and Information Needs of Parents Caring for a Child With a Urinary Tract Infection: A Qualitative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Urinary tract infections (UTIs) are common in children, however, clinical practice variations can leave parents unsure how to care for their child. We aim to develop knowledge tools that provide evidence-based information about pediatric UTIs. To inform tool development, we asked parents to share their experiences and information needs in caring for a child with a UTI. Using qualitative description methods, 16 semistructured interviews were conducted with 18 parents. Parents were recruited through the emergency department (ED) of a major Canadian urban pediatric hospital. Five major themes emerged: (1) parent descriptions of their child's symptoms and behaviors; (2) UTIs have an effect on the entire family; (3) reasons for going to the ED; (4) parent experiences with UTI treatment, management, and follow-up strategies for their child; and (5) parent information needs and preferred information sources for UTIs. Our findings highlight the diversity of UTI symptoms children experience, which causes uncertainty and confusion for parents. This diversity suggests the development of knowledge tools for parents about UTIs is needed.
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 | 0.011 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".