Mindfulness-based retreat for mothers of paediatric heart transplant recipients: protocol for a pilot intervention study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Mothers are often the primary caregivers for children requiring heart transplantation. Given that a mother's ability to successfully cope with the demands of her caregiving role may be predictive of positive familial psychosocial outcomes, it is critical that maternal coping is assessed and supported in paediatric healthcare. Mindfulness-based programmes are proposed as one intervention that may enhance quality of life, improve distress tolerance and coping and reduce social isolation in caregiving populations. This pilot study aims to investigate: (1) the implementation success of a mindfulness-based retreat (MBR), and (2) the effectiveness of a MBR at improving quality of life, distress tolerance, coping and perceived social support for mothers of paediatric heart transplant recipients. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A convergent parallel, mixed-method design is proposed for this pilot, exploratory study. Twenty mothers will participate in this pilot MBR held at a resort in Ontario, Canada. Quantitative data will be obtained using five standardised instruments completed at three time points: (T1) 24-hours prior to the intervention, (T2) immediately on completion of the intervention, and (T3) three months post-intervention. Qualitative data will be collected from all participants both through semi-structured focus groups at T2 and individual telephone interviews at T3. Focus groups and individual interviews will be transcribed verbatim for thematic analysis. Quantitative and qualitative data will be merged and compared during interpretation to ensure that the intervention implementation and effectiveness of the MBR retreat are described with comprehensive accuracy. The primary outcomes will be feasibility in relation to implementation effectiveness and participants' perception of social support for efficacy of the MBR intervention. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study received Institutional Research Ethics Board approval from The Hospital for Sick Children (Number: 1000064719). Informed consent will be obtained prior to participant enrolment. Findings will be disseminated via conference presentations and submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.
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 | 0.033 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.053 | 0.010 |
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".