The Caring Intensively Study: Three-Year Follow-Up Findings From a Mixed Methods Study of Children’s Psychological and Behavioral Responses After PICU Hospitalization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To report the 3-year follow-up results of the "Caring Intensively" study, which examined children's psychological and behavioral responses after PICU hospitalization. DESIGN: Prospective mixed methods, concurrent triangulation design. In the quantitative arm, study group (SG) and comparison group (CG) children and their parents were administered a battery of measures assessing psychological and behavioral outcomes, and telephone survey data were collected 6 weeks, 6 months, 1, 2, and 3 years post-discharge. In the qualitative arm, SG interviews were conducted 1 and 3 years post-discharge. Recruitment 2014-2018, with follow-up completed 2021. SETTING: SG recruited from PICUs of three Canadian quaternary care pediatric hospitals; CG from two hospitals' ear, nose, and throat (ENT) day surgery units. PATIENTS: Age (3-12 yr) and gender-matched PICU children (SG, 158) or day surgery ENT children (CG, 169) and their parents were recruited; 62% of families completed the study (SG, 97; CG, 106). Selected SG families were interviewed at year 1 (17 families, 30 participants) and year 3 (14 families, 27 participants). INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: No group differences on primary or secondary outcomes. Both groups reported emotional and behavioral changes in children via telephone survey; however, group findings diverged on their nature and attribution. SG parents attributed changes primarily to PICU hospitalization; CG parents attributed changes to other life events. At year 3, 40.3% of SG parents still reported negative emotional and behavioral changes in children suggesting a chronic trajectory of recovery. Qualitative interview findings converged with SG survey responses, reflecting the adaptive and relational challenges confronting children and families. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights children's emotional and behavioral responses over the 3 years post-PICU and the need to study child recovery within the family. These findings contribute to our understanding of the nature and duration of trajectories of recovery and emphasize the importance of providing clinical follow-up and prioritizing family-identified outcomes in future research.
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 | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".