‘Our time is precious’: An exploration of parental feeding behaviours for boys with Duchenne muscular dystrophy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".