Protocol for evaluation of the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of a targeted transition readiness workshop intervention for pediatric brain tumor survivors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pediatric brain tumor survivors (PBTS) are at risk of physical, cognitive, and psychosocial challenges related to their diagnosis and treatment. Routine follow-up care as adults is therefore essential to their long-term health and quality of life. In order to successfully navigate to adult healthcare, it is recommended that youth develop transition readiness skills. Existing transition readiness interventions often focus on disease management. However, PBTS are also at risk of social competence and cognitive functioning challenges. In this paper, we describe the protocol of this pilot study and the methodology that will be used for the evaluation of the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy testing of the first targeted transition intervention workshops specifically designed to meet the needs of PBTS and their caregivers. METHODS: This study will use a mixed method to evaluate three 1 ½-h workshops targeted for dyads (N = 40) of PBTS (14 years or older) and their parents. Dyads will be recruited via a community pediatric cancer organization and the long-term follow-up clinic of a large pediatric hospital. Participants will complete an online survey which includes the Transition Readiness Assessment Questionnaire (TRAQ) before and after the workshops. Each workshop will cover a specific topic related to PBTS transition readiness: disease management, social competence, and cognitive functioning. Workshops will follow the same structure: topic presentation, discussion by a post-transfer survivor or parent, teaching two strategies, and workshop evaluation. Workshops will be co-led by healthcare specialists and patient partners. Feasibility and acceptability will be assessed via recruitment, attendance, retention, and Likert scales, and they will be analyzed by describing and comparing rates. Satisfaction will be measured using satisfaction surveys and audio-recorded focus groups. Qualitative data will be described through thematic content analysis. In order to test the preliminary efficacy of this study, we will compare transition readiness skills pre- and post-workshops using paired samples T test and ANCOVA to examine the impact of workshop on TRAQ skills. DISCUSSION: Results of the study will inform refinement and future broader implementation of targeted transition readiness workshops for the specific needs of pediatric brain tumor survivors.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".