Family Experiences with Care for Children with Inherited Metabolic Diseases in Canada: A Cross-Sectional Survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Children with inherited metabolic diseases often require complex and highly specialized care. Patient and family-centered care can improve health outcomes that are important to families. This study aimed to examine experiences of family caregivers (parents/guardians) of children diagnosed with inherited metabolic diseases with healthcare to inform strategies to improve those experiences. METHODS: A cross-sectional mailed survey was conducted of family caregivers recruited from an ongoing cohort study. Participants rated their healthcare experiences during their child's visits to five types of healthcare settings common for inherited metabolic diseases: the metabolic clinic, the emergency department, hospital inpatient units, the blood laboratory, and the pharmacy. Participants provided narrative descriptions of any memorable negative or positive experiences. RESULTS: There were 248 respondents (response rate 49%). Caregivers were generally very or somewhat satisfied with the care provided at each care setting. Appropriate treatment, provider knowledge, provider communication, and care coordination were deemed essential aspects of satisfaction with care by the majority of participants across many settings. Memorable negative experiences were reported by 8-22% of participants, varying by setting. Among participants who reported memorable negative experiences, contributing factors included providers' demeanor, lack of communication, lack of involvement of the family, and disregard of an emergency protocol letter provided by the family. CONCLUSIONS: While caregivers' satisfaction with care for children with inherited metabolic diseases was high, we identified gaps in family-centered care and factors contributing to negative experiences that are important to consider in the future development of strategies to improve pediatric care for inherited metabolic diseases.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".