Receiving a Prenatal or Postnatal Diagnosis of (Dis)Ability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT: The phenomenon of carrying and birthing an infant with a (dis)ability is complex and emotionally driven for parents. Infants with (dis)abilities are at risk for long-term health and developmental challenges, which may cause fear and stress in families. Parents report dissatisfaction with their experience of learning of their infant's (dis)ability diagnosis. After unexpected news is given to expecting or new parents prenatally or postnatally, it is the nurse who is often left with parents during an extremely emotional and vulnerable time. Although nurses play a pivotal role in supporting parents through this vulnerable time, their specific role is not well defined. This narrative synthesis reviews the role of the nurse during complex family situations and applies findings to their role in supporting families through receiving the diagnosis of a (dis)ability for their infant either prenatally or postnatally. Nurses can assist parents through this process of adaptation by using a compassionate and empathetic approach in their care, facilitating opportunities for parent-infant bonding, speaking with person-first language, clarifying complex information, and assisting with allocation of various internal and external resources. Future research dedicated to the creation of best practice clinical guidelines on communicating with families during the diagnosis of (dis)ability would assist nurses and other health care professionals in meeting the multifaceted and sensitive needs of parents and families, ultimately contributing to improved health outcomes for the parents, family, and infant.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".