Childhood Cancer and the Family: A Pilot Proposal for Comprehensive Intervention at the Time of Diagnosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Childhood cancer has a great impact on children and their environment. To minimize this, countries such as Canada and the USA have protocols in the field of social work, although these are scarce in Europe and especially in Spain. This paper aims to develop a pilot protocol in Aragon (Spain) for the practice of onco-pediatric social work in one of the hardest moments: the diagnosis. For its elaboration, a previous study was carried out in three phases, which provided data on the disease and its impact on the family and children and a methodological basis for the intervention from social work, all considering the participation of the agents involved as a fundamental element. Variables have been identified that influence the impact on the family support network and its quality of life at the time of diagnosis of childhood cancer. In addition, different indicators have been explored, based on the reality of these families. Finally, a pilot proposal for a comprehensive family intervention protocol in the diagnosis of childhood cancer has been elaborated. This work is intended to be a guide for intervention and delimitation of quality standards to be considered when dealing with the diagnosis of childhood cancer.
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 | 0.035 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.001 |
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".