Quality of life and caregiver burden in pediatric glaucoma: A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pediatric conditions can lead to significant caregiver burden and poor quality of life (QoL). This systematic review describes research relating to caregiver burden and QoL of caregivers of pediatric glaucoma patients. A systematic database search of Embase, Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science, and the three journals within the Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology (ARVO) was conducted in October 2021. Publications underwent abstract and full-text screening and were included if they reported pediatric caregivers' QoL using quantitative or qualitative methods. Review articles, publications not in English, and articles focusing on adult glaucoma patients were excluded. Studies then underwent risk of bias assessment and data extraction. Of the 105 publications identified, 8 publications with 667 participants were included in the review. Studies indicated significantly higher burden and poor QoL in caregivers. Female sex, lower education level, lower income, and working status of caregivers were associated with poorer QoL and greater burden. Additionally, more severe and longer duration of the child's disease negatively impacted these measures of caregiver wellbeing. Additionally, studies found significant improvement in caregiver QoL after patients underwent surgery with combined trabeculotomy-trabeculectomy. In conclusion, few studies have investigated the impact of pediatric glaucoma on caregivers. This review of the existing studies found poor QoL and high levels of caregiver burden within this population. Given the lifelong nature of pediatric glaucoma, there is a need for further longitudinal research focusing on the caregivers of these pediatric patients. Long-term follow-up would allow for a greater understanding of how caregiver QoL changes over the course of the disease.
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 | 0.006 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".