MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410124945 · doi:10.1177/26344041251339817

Factors related to post-traumatic stress disorder in parents of children with neurodevelopmental disabilities: A systematic review and narrative synthesis

2025· review· en· W4410124945 on OpenAlexafffund
Sydney F. Walker, Karen McEwan, A. R. Grant, Patrick J. McGrath

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Systems Therapy Culture and Attachments · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFamily and Disability Support Research
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityIzaak Walton Killam Health Centre
FundersIWK Health CentreChildren's Hospital Foundation
KeywordsPsychologyTraumatic stressNarrativeNarrative reviewDevelopmental psychologyClinical psychologyAcute Stress DisorderPsychotherapistPosttraumatic stressLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: This study aims to summarize the existing literature on factors associated with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) among parents of children with a neurodevelopmental disability. Methods: A systematic search of three databases was conducted using predefined criteria. Studies were screened for eligibility by title/abstract, followed by full-text review. Data was extracted to capture key information including study characteristics, participant demographics, and factors associated with PTSD. A narrative thematic analysis was employed to identify and categorize findings. Heterogeneity across studies precluded a meta-analysis, thus a narrative review was conducted. Results: From a pool of 15,852 studies, six articles published between 2002 and 2023 were included. Among the factors studied, lower levels of social support, increased caregiving demands, and parent’s history of depression were most frequently associated with elevated PTSD scores. Conclusion: This study offers insights into the factors associated with caregiver PTSD, highlighting the need for 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.042
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.042
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.005
Bibliometrics0.0120.011
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.055
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.341 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman Systems Therapy Culture and AttachmentsSame topicFamily and Disability Support ResearchFrench-language works237,207