MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384397899 · doi:10.1111/jir.13061

An online survey to understand the needs of caregivers of family members with 22q11 deletion syndrome

2023· article· en· W4384397899 on OpenAlexafffund
Tammy Cosman, Alexandra Finless, Andrea L. Rideout, Patricia Lingley‐Pottie, L. D. Palmer, Andrea Shugar, Donna M. McDonald‐McGinn, Ann Swillen, Patrick J. McGrath, Anne S. Bassett, Cheryl Cytrynbaum, M. Orr, Sandra Meier

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Intellectual Disability Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFamily and Disability Support Research
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenSickKids FoundationUniversity of TorontoDalhousie UniversityUniversity Health NetworkToronto General HospitalNova Scotia Health AuthorityCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthIzaak Walton Killam Health Centre
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanada Foundation for Innovation
KeywordsPsychosocialPsychological interventionIntervention (counseling)PsychologyFamily caregiversSocial supportPeer supportMedical educationGerontologyNursingMedicinePsychiatryPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Most individuals with 22q11.2 deletion syndrome (22q11DS) have multi-system and lifelong needs requiring substantial support. Their primary caregivers are usually family members who dedicate lifelong time and effort to their role. The pressures of their roles can negatively impact caregivers' psychosocial well-being, suggesting a need for additional support for this community who currently have no specialised interventions available. METHOD: This online study surveyed 103 caregivers of family members with 22q11DS to determine the barriers to accessing support that they faced, the kind of support they would value and whether an online intervention could meet their needs. RESULTS: The caregivers indicated that a brief online intervention focused on teaching practical skills and connecting them with a peer network of support would be most valuable. CONCLUSIONS: Future studies are planned that will build on these results by designing and testing online interventions tailored to this community.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.272
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.354
GPT teacher head0.467
Teacher spread0.113 · 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.

Study designObservational
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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Intellectual Disability ResearchSame topicFamily and Disability Support ResearchFrench-language works237,207