Experiences and Therapy Needs of Parents With an Infant at High Risk for Development of Unilateral Spastic Cerebral Palsy: A Qualitative Interview Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim: To understand experiences and therapy needs of parents with an infant with unilateral perinatal brain injury and at high risk for unilateral spastic cerebral palsy in the first year. Patients and Methods: Sixteen parents (from 8 children with unilateral spastic cerebral palsy, 3 without) diagnosed with unilateral perinatal brain injury participated in semistructured interviews. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis. Results: The overarching theme, “an unexpected journey,” included 4 subthemes: (1) “A roller coaster start”—stressful initial experiences on a neonatal intensive care unit; (2) “Wishing for a crystal ball”—need for information on (future) development; (3) “Reaching for the stars”—value of therapist guidance in supporting infant development; (4) “Growing seeds of confidence”—increased parental confidence in their child's development and their role. Conclusion: Parents have information needs about their child's (future) neurodevelopment. Physical or occupational therapists provide information, monitor motor progress, and guide parents in supporting development and can offer needed reassurance.
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 | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".