Targeted Transition Readiness Workshops for Pediatric Brain Tumor Survivors: Feasibility, Acceptability, and Preliminary Effects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pediatric brain tumor survivors (PBTS) are at risk for late effects related to their diagnosis and treatment. Long-term medical follow-ups are deemed essential, implying a transition from pediatric to adult healthcare settings. This pilot study aims to assess the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary effects of a targeted transition readiness intervention for PBTS. The program consisted of three hybrid workshops that targeted disease-related self-management skills, social skills, and cognitive functioning, as well as parallel workshops for their caregivers. The feasibility and acceptability were assessed through recruitment, retention, and satisfaction rates. Preliminary effects were primarily assessed via a pre/post assessment of transition readiness skills using the Transition Readiness Assessment (TRAQ) questionnaire. Among the eligible dyads, 12 (38%) consented to participate. Ten dyads participated in at least two workshops, and six dyads participated in all workshops. Overall, the participants were satisfied with the intervention (parents = 86%; PBTS = 73%). Although not statistically significant, a clinically relevant post-workshop increase in transition readiness skills was observed for PBTS (d = 0.36) and their caregivers (d = 0.25). The results suggest the relevance of the intervention and encourage further developments. Adjustments are needed to optimize reach and efficacy. The workshops have the potential to be adapted to be more accessible and shorter.
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 | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".