MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Hospitalization perceived by children and adolescents undergoing cancer treatment

2021· article· en· W3164186260 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista gaúcha de enfermagem · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThematic analysisReferralCancer treatmentMedicineRecreationPerceptionQualitative researchMultidisciplinary approachChildhood cancerFamily medicinePediatric cancerCancerNursingPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To know the perception of children and adolescents undergoing cancer treatment about hospitalization. METHODS: Qualitative research conducted with 13 children and adolescents hospitalized for cancer treatment at a referral hospital in southern Brazil. Semi-structured interviews mediated by the drawing technique were conducted from May to November 2018. Data was submitted to inductive thematic analysis based on the theoretical framework of Brazil's National Humanization Policy. RESULTS: Disturbances were detected in the professionals' communication with the hospitalized children and adolescents. The participants felt socially isolated and highlighted the importance of recreational activities during hospitalization. CONCLUSION: Infant cancer is complex and needs multidisciplinary care during the treatment, enabling the organization of healthy and welcoming spaces that favor humanization of care.

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.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.955

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.299 · 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