‘This battle, between your gut feeling and your mind. Try to find the right balance’: Parental experiences of children with spinal muscular atrophy during COVID‐19 pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: Parents of children with spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) often struggle with the all-consuming nature of the demands of caring for a child with substantial physical needs. Our aim was to explore experiences, challenges and needs of parents of a child with SMA in a COVID-19 pandemic situation. METHOD: Nineteen parents of 21 children (15 months to 13 years of age) with SMA types 1-3 participated in semi-structured interviews in June to July 2020. The interviews were analysed using inductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Parents mentioned the protection of the health and well-being of the child as the central perspective and driving force during the COVID-19 pandemic. Three subthemes were identified: (1) responsibility, (2) balancing vulnerability and resilience and (3) (in)security. Some parents focused on the positive aspects during the lockdown, such as continuation of nusinersen treatment and family life. Some parents described helpful and positive cognitions to cope with the situation. In general, parents described a need for information with regard to COVID-19 and their child with SMA and a need for discussing their dilemmas and insecurities with a healthcare professional. INTERPRETATION: Parents put the health and well-being of their children first during the pandemic. From this study, we learned that parents of children with SMA need information and value direct contact with a healthcare professional to share their dilemmas and insecurities. The dialogue can help to empower parents in the conflicts and decisions they have to make during a pandemic.
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 | 0.004 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 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".