Unique Circumstances and Family Stress: Having a Sibling with Prader-Willi Syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Raising a child with neuro-atypical needs is challenging for any family. It is not surprising that many aspects of parental stress, anxiety, depression, and raising children with special needs have many research publications. This study looks at the specific genetic disorder Prader-Willi Syndrome (PWS) and its effects on family members. PWS affects approximately 1 in 10,000 to 1 in 30,000 live births (Magill et al. 2020). Individuals with PWS have multiple symptoms, including hypertonia during infancy, developmental delay, maladaptive behavioral problems (extreme stubbornness and tantrums), scoliosis, strabismus, hypogonadism, and hyperphagia (Holm et al. 1993). Rather than focus on the parental context of raising an individual with PWS, this study will explore the impact of the siblings raised with a brother or sister with PWS. Precisely, this study will measure to what degree these siblings experience stress in their daily lives. This study will target teens from 13-17 years old and adult siblings 18 years and older. The results will be analyzed and compared to siblings raised with brothers and sisters that are neurotypical. Department: Psychology Faculty Mentor: Dr. Sean Rogers
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".