MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399956847 · doi:10.1177/21582440241260052

Perceptions of Child Vulnerability, Parental Overprotection, and Parenting Stress among Parents of a Child with Cancer

2024· article· en· W4399956847 on OpenAlexaff
Min Ah Kim, Jaehee Yi, Jina Sang, Soo hyun Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueSAGE Open · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFamily Support in Illness
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVulnerability (computing)Developmental psychologyPsychologyPerceptionParenting stylesStress (linguistics)Clinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Parents of child with cancer often perceive their child as vulnerable and are at risk of overprotecting their child because of the challenges associated with the illness. We examined the relationships of perceived child vulnerability, parental overprotection, and parenting stress among Korean parents of a child with cancer. A sample of 163 parents of a child with cancer completed questionnaires. Perceived child vulnerability was associated with parenting stress. Parental overprotection was associated with parental distress and difficult child, but not dysfunctional parent–child interactions. This study emphasizes the need to consider parenting capacity variables in the context of childhood cancer.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.964

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.302 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAGE OpenSame topicFamily Support in IllnessFrench-language works237,207