Survey of families’ psychosocial needs in the context of pediatric cancer: a first step toward the participatory development of a group intervention
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pediatric cancer is associated with stressors that increase the risk for distress across family members. Psychosocial support varies and may not meet family needs and preferences. This study investigated family members' points of view regarding psychosocial service needs, as a first step of a large participative research project aiming to develop interventions grounded in key stakeholders' perspectives. METHODS: This study documented the perceptions of 370 parents, 11 siblings, and 60 individuals who themselves had received a cancer diagnosis as a child and employed a mixed-methods design through an online survey. RESULTS: Respondents indicated their key concerns were coping with intense emotions, accepting their feelings toward the diagnosis, and managing the psychological burden that accompanies cancer, its treatment, and associated life changes. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that an intervention program should address emotion management as well as interventions focusing on the entire family system.
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 | 0.007 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".