MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3144919505 · doi:10.1177/23743735211008299

Exploring the Experiences and Information Needs of Parents Caring for a Child With a Urinary Tract Infection: A Qualitative Study

2021· article· en· W3144919505 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Alyson Campbell, Lisa Hartling, Samantha Louie‐Poon, Shannon D. Scott

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Patient Experience · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUrinary Tract Infections Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersWomen and Children's Health Research Institute
KeywordsConfusionQualitative researchDiversity (politics)MedicineEmergency departmentFamily medicineNursingPediatricsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.263

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.065
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.272 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Patient ExperienceSame topicUrinary Tract Infections ManagementFrench-language works237,207