MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4296711588 · doi:10.1177/10664807221125895

“For me, it's a real pain”: A Foray into the Experience of Parents Involved in Family-Based Treatment

2022· article· en· W4296711588 on OpenAlexaff
Isabelle Thibault, Karissa Leduc, Anne‐Marie Tougas, Caroline Pesant

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Family Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEating Disorders and Behaviors
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de SherbrookeUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnorexia nervosaEating disordersPsychologyFamily therapyBulimia nervosaPerspective (graphical)Qualitative researchPsychiatryClinical psychologyMedicineDevelopmental psychologyPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Eating disorders are undoubtedly challenging for the adolescents experiencing them, but they can also be challenging for their parents. The current study employed a qualitative research design to examine the challenges endured by parents raising adolescents with eating disorders and undergoing a Family-Based Treatment (FBT) program. Six mothers of adolescents with anorexia nervosa or bulimia were interviewed about the challenges they face as parents of a child with an eating disorder and the changes they have had to make in their lives. Overall, results highlighted challenges from a personal, family, and parental role lens. Findings also call attention to the difficult responsibilities placed on parents during FBT programs such as involvement in their child's refeeding plan and the emotional toll their child's experience places on them. Implications for the level of support needed by parents are discussed according to their role in FBT programs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0100.008
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations15
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Family JournalSame topicEating Disorders and BehaviorsFrench-language works237,207