Development of Self-Efficacy Tools for Parents and Professionals Caring for Children and Young People with Lymphedema (ILF Parent SE and ILF Professional SE)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Self-management is a key aspect of lymphedema treatment and self-efficacy is a key factor linked to long-term adherence to treatment. The study aimed to generate self-efficacy scales to support the care of children and adolescents with lymphedema to support self-management. Methods and Results: Parents of children with lymphedema and the professionals caring for them were recruited during a lymphedema educational camp. Six individual semistructured focus groups were undertaken in Italian, French, and English (three for parents and three for professionals) with simultaneous translation. Scale item generation was developed using interpretative phenomenological analysis and adopted Bandura's self-efficacy concept. Two self-efficacy tools were developed from research with 26 parents and 14 professionals. The parental tool (ILF parent SE) has 6 domains and 44 items: school; home and leisure; understanding the condition and treatment, and managing child and parent emotions. The professional tool (ILF Professional SE) has 4 domains and 21 items. This scale has two parts; the first indicates the level of professional autonomy in decision making, and the second covers assessment and treatment, patient understanding, and managing emotional reactions. Both tools adopt a 0- to 100-point scale using a 10-unit interval with 0 (cannot do) through to 100 (high certainty of being able to do). Initial face validity has been undertaken. Conclusion: Self-efficacy has emerged as a complex issue faced by parents and professionals involved with children and young people with lymphedema. By being able to assess the challenges parents face in self-efficacy individualized programs can be developed that will assist families in managing this complex disease and lead to greater well-being. Increased professional self-awareness will help the development of mentorship programs to support professionals dealing daily with the stress of managing a rare disease in which the outcome may be uncertain.
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 | 0.017 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".