Parental Experiences of Administering Pediatric <i>Tuina</i> for Sleep and Appetite in Early School-Aged Children With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: Qualitative Study in Hong Kong
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Previous research suggested that parent-administered pediatric tuina could improve symptoms of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), such as sleep quality and appetite. Objective: This study aimed to explore the experiences and perceptions of parents administering pediatric tuina to school-aged children with ADHD in Hong Kong. Methods: This qualitative study was embedded in a pilot randomized controlled trial on parent-administered pediatric tuina for improving sleep and appetite in school-aged children diagnosed with ADHD. Purposive sampling was used to invite 12 parents who attended a pediatric tuina training program and delivered the intervention to their children at home for at least 8 weeks. Data were collected through semistructured focus group interviews and individual interviews, which were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using thematic analysis. Results: Two main themes emerged: (1) effects of parent-administered pediatric tuina and (2) parents' experience of administering pediatric tuina. Parents reported significant improvements in children's sleep quality, appetite, behavior, mental state, and academic performance. Facilitators provided professional guidance and applied a user-friendly course design. Challenges included difficulties in mastering techniques, locating acupuncture points, and time management. Participants suggested the need for more traditional Chinese medicine pattern diagnostic sessions, real-time supervision methods, and extended follow-up to better observe long-term effects. Conclusions: Parent-administered pediatric tuina was perceived to improve children's sleep quality and appetite significantly, along with other aspects of well-being. Professional guidance and a structured training program facilitated implementation, and challenges highlighted the need for more frequent diagnostic sessions, real-time supervision, and extended follow-up.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 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".