Family-centered service through the eyes of insiders: Healthcare providers who are parents speak about receiving and providing healthcare in child health
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: When healthcare providers (HCPs) become patients, the experience affects their sense of identity, the care they receive, and their clinical practice. In child health, considerably less is known about the experiences of HCP-parents who access the pediatric healthcare system with their own children with disabilities and/or chronic medical conditions. AIMS: This study aimed to examine the experiences of HCPs who have children with disabilities to identify their experiences with healthcare delivery. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: A qualitative descriptive study was conducted with HCP-parents, using focus groups and open-ended interviews. Data were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: For HCP-parents, the experience of having a child with a disability affects how they see themselves, their patients, service organizations, and the healthcare system in general. Having medical knowledge and access to networks brings both benefits and unique challenges. HCP-parents also have unique needs that are not currently being addressed. The lived experiences of HCP-parents can contribute to improving patient care. However, the value of this lived experience is unrecognized and underutilized. CONCLUSIONS: The lived experiences of HCP-parents can contribute important insights regarding service delivery, and in particular regarding the application of Family-Centered Service.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".