Assessing the supportive care needs of parents of children with rare diseases in Ireland
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Rare diseases are individually uncommon yet collectively prevalent. They affect over 300,000 people in Ireland, with 50-70 % impacting children. This study explores the supportive care needs of parents caring for children with rare diseases in Ireland, utilising a validated Parental Needs Scale for Rare Diseases (PNS-RD). DESIGN AND METHODS: This descriptive quantitative study employed survey techniques to assess parental support needs. An online survey was administered to parents across Ireland from August 2021 to December 2021 using the Qualtrics™ platform. RESULTS: Out of 107 consented participants, 89 provided data suitable for analysis. Findings revealed significant challenges, with children averaging six hospital visits per year; 77 % of families indicated special education needs, and 42 % required medically complex care. The PNS-RD scale mean was M = 48.62 (95 % CI: 44.5-52.7), comprising four dimensions (each scored out of 25): i) Understanding the disease (M = 9.01, 95 % CI: 7.5-10.5), ii) Working with health professionals (M = 13.68, 95 % CI: 12.0-15.4), iii) Emotional issues (M = 13.22, 95 % CI: 12.0-14.5), and iv) Financial needs (M = 12.94, 95 % CI: 11.2-14.6). Parents demonstrated confidence in managing their child's care but reported considerable emotional strain and financial challenges. CONCLUSION: While parents generally felt confident in handling their child's rare disease and were moderately satisfied with the care and support received, the emotional, psychological, and financial toll remained high. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This study underscores the urgent need for comprehensive support systems to alleviate these burdens, advocating for tailored healthcare and social support interventions to meet the diverse needs of these families.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".