The perceived impact of pediatric food allergy on mental health care needs and supports: A pilot study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Evidence suggests a mental health impact of food allergy on affected children and their families; however, little is known about health care professionals' understanding of these impacts and the resources available to patients and their families. Objective: Our aim was to conduct a pilot study examining health care professionals' perceptions of the psychosocial and financial burden of food allergy to identify gaps in education and resources and thus better support families with food allergy moving forward. Methods: Between February 20 and November 19, 2020, we conducted audiorecorded interviews (n = 6) and profession-specific focus groups (n = 2 [representing 7 individuals]). The participants included pediatric allergists, allergy nurse educators, and clinical dietitians who were directly involved in pediatric food allergy care. The interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Thematic analysis was subsequently applied to identify the main themes. Results: These themes describe issues surrounding access to information and resources and how this can affect anxiety and parenting styles among families with food allergy. Conclusions: Health care professionals perceive that many families experience anxiety as a result of their child's food allergy. They further advocate that access to information and suitability of public resources be considered when planning for related programs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".