MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293795143 · doi:10.1111/cch.13054

‘Our time is precious’: An exploration of parental feeding behaviours for boys with Duchenne muscular dystrophy

2022· article· en· W4293795143 on OpenAlexafffund
Meaghan Walker, Laura McAdam, Reshma Amin, Toni Lui, Amy C. McPherson

Bibliographic record

VenueChild Care Health and Development · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMuscle Physiology and Disorders
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of TorontoHolland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation Hospital
FundersMuscular Dystrophy Canada
KeywordsDuchenne muscular dystrophyPsychologyQualitative researchDevelopmental psychologyPopulationHealth careMedicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Due to the increased risk of obesity for boys with Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD), recent guidelines recommend that dietary intake is carefully managed. Parents play an important role in the development of their child's eating behaviours and patterns. However, despite what is known about the increased risk of obesity for children with DMD, little is known about parental feeding behaviours in this population. The objective of this study was to qualitatively explore the experiences of parents of children with DMD around their child's weight management and understand what influences their feeding behaviours. METHODS: This paper reports a secondary data analysis. Semi-structured, individual interviews were conducted and analysed using qualitative description. RESULTS: Thirteen parents were interviewed for the study. Three themes were developed: (1) parent responses to healthcare provider interactions, (2) mixed emotions contributing to feeding approach and (3) variable parenting feeding styles. Within the third theme, two subthemes arose including (1) control and preoccupation and (2) striking a balance. CONCLUSION: Given the potential impact of higher weights on the progression of DMD, it is important that healthcare providers explore feeding behaviours with families. However, it is essential that healthcare providers consider the impact of these conversations on parents, as well as the broader issues that may place additional pressure on the lives of families.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.544
Threshold uncertainty score0.414

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.253 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChild Care Health and DevelopmentSame topicMuscle Physiology and DisordersFrench-language works237,207