CLIMB® Program Evaluation of Quality of life, the Stress Response, Self Esteem in Children Whose Parent Has Cancer: Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Children with a parent who has cancer express fears about cancer contagion, parental death and security of their life. CLIMB® (Children’s Lives Include Moments of Bravery) is a support program to improve children’s ability to cope with their parent’s cancer. This pilot study aims to describe the emotional impact of CLIMB® on children with a parent who has cancer. The elementary school version of QOL (Quality of life), the SRS-C (Stress Response Scale for Children), Self Esteem, and satisfaction were evaluated. Participants were seven children (three girls, four boys). All participants were satisfied with CLIMB®. The QOL scores significantly increased from 79.9 (SD, 19.1; median, 86.7) points before the intervention to 85.1 (SD, 15.7; median, 90.0) points after the intervention, indicating an improvement in the QOL (p=0.046). Subscale was no significant difference according to sex. In the SRS-C scores no item showed significant differences in the pre- and post-intervention scores. The total score had decreased, indicating a decrease in the stress response. The boys showed a slight increase in the scores on the physical state subscale. The self-esteem scale scores were difference between the pre- and post-intervention scores increased significantly for the total score (p=0.028) and the subscales of “self in relationships” (p=0.042) and “self-assertion and self-determination” (p=0.038). During CLIMB®, children received accurate cancer knowledge; and valued sharing their feelings among others who are in the same situation. Children were highly satisfied with the program, although small changes were seen in QOL and stress.
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 | 0.070 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 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".