‘There’s no club, absolutely nothing’: Experiences of parents of Veterans living with illnesses and injuries in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Research and programs for Veteran families often target those with young children, leaving parents overlooked, despite the role some adopt to support adult children following military-acquired illnesses or injuries. The objective of this study was to lay groundwork in studying the experiences of parents of Veterans through an initial exploration of parents of Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) Veterans living with operational stress injuries (OSI). Methods: A phenomenological approach was used to create rich, thick narratives focusing on experiences and meanings, collected through in-depth semi-structured interviews conducted with 15 parents of CAF Veterans with OSI. Interpretive phenomenological analysis was done during data collection. Rigour was enhanced through reflexive practices and team debriefing. Results: Six themes described parents' experiences: 1) being exasperated by persistent, dynamic, and unanticipated demands for instrumental support, 2) living in a constant state of worry and guilt about their adult children, 3) feeling at a loss for what to do and where to go for support, 4) dealing with consequences to their own health and well-being, 5) wreaking havoc on relationships, and 6) being left to pick up the pieces alone. Discussion: Parents of CAF Veterans living with OSI described feeling forgotten, despite significant costs in supporting their children. This exploration invites several future research directions, including a more in-depth exploration of the caregiving role parents may adopt, implementation of a family-centred circle of care, help navigating the system, connection with other families, psychoeducation, and public awareness.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.022 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| 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".