Parents’ Experiences With an Early Behavioral Intervention, H-HOPE, in the NICU and at Home
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Early parent involvement in an infant's neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) stay has positive benefits for the parent, the preterm infant, and the parent-infant relationship. H-HOPE (Hospital to Home: Optimizing the Preterm Infant's Environment) is an early behavioral intervention that provides an innovative developmental approach and contributes to parents' opportunity to provide care for their infant in the NICU. PURPOSE: To explore parents' experience with H-HOPE. METHODS: This qualitative study consists of one-on-one interviews with parents as part of a larger study investigating H-HOPE's implementation and effectiveness. Data from 38 parents encompassing 54 interviews are included in this analysis. RESULTS: Parents report experiencing many benefits from participating in H-HOPE, including an increase in confidence, understanding of infant cues, promotion of bonding, infant benefits, and improvement in relationships with staff. Facilitators to participation include teaching and support in the NICU, being able to be present regularly, family support, and positive infant responses. Barriers to participating in the NICU were infant condition and readiness, family and economic limitations, lack of parent training or readiness, and nurse availability and communication. A lack of time and infant readiness were barriers at home. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE AND RESEARCH: Our findings highlight the importance of early behavioral interventions like H-HOPE that support parent-partnered care, which promotes parents' participation in their infants' care. NICU nurses play a critical role in facilitating parent participation and confidence. Future research should examine policies and programs to help enhance NICU nurses' readiness and ability to engage with and support parents.
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".