Psychosocial Challenges of Parents of Children Undergoing Chemotherapy: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Context: Childhood cancer constitutes a significant health challenge, profoundly affecting families and placing substantial psychological and social burdens on parents who assume the role of primary caregivers. Objectives: The present systematic review examines the psychosocial challenges faced by parents of children undergoing chemotherapy, using evidence from 16 studies published between 2010 and 2025. Methods: This review combines 16 of the 99 eligible articles published between January 2010 and March 2025. A comprehensive search was conducted across five databases: PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and SID, utilizing predetermined keywords. Study selection focused on relevance to the psychosocial experiences of these parents. Two independent reviewers carried out data extraction. The methodological quality of included studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool, Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, and CASP checklist. Both quantitative and qualitative data were analyzed using a thematic synthesis approach. Results: Parents frequently report a range of psychological difficulties, such as ongoing stress, guilt, sleep disturbances, and reduced quality of life. Social challenges, including diminished support systems, financial strain, and conflicts related to managing work and family obligations, are also prevalent. Conclusions: The results underscore the critical need for specialized psychosocial interventions and improved structural support for families confronting childhood cancer. Establishing comprehensive support services within pediatric oncology settings is vital to reducing parental psychosocial burden and improving the overall standard of care for children diagnosed with cancer.
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 | 0.007 | 0.045 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".