(Re)Establishment of fatherhood among fathers of children with mental disorders: A qualitative metasynthesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This metasynthesis synthesized and interpreted qualitative research results on the experience of fathers who care for children with mental disorders. It followed the guidelines from the Enhancing Transparency in Reporting the Synthesis of Qualitative Research statement. A search was conducted in five databases. The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme qualitative research checklist was used to evaluate the quality of the studies, and the Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research (Grade-CERQual) approach was used to assess review findings. Thematic analysis of 12 articles included yielded the theme (re)establishment of fatherhood and four subthemes: redefinition of expectations, redefinition of the fatherhood role, benefits achieved with increased father involvement, and strengths and challenges in fatherhood, all of which demonstrated how repercussions from diagnosis and redefinition of expectations of masculinity and fatherhood affected the way fathers exercise fatherhood. Fathers were participative and attentive to their child’s needs, even in a challenging context demanding integration of care with work obligations. This metasynthesis highlights challenges faced by fathers in acquiring new skills and competencies while caring for their children. The findings identify a need for interventions to facilitate fathers’ involvement in caring for their children.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".