Experiences of decisional conflict in parents offered hip reconstructive surgery for their child with cerebral palsy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Using a mixed methods study to explore the level of parents' decisional conflict and decision-making experiences when offered hip surgery for their child with non-ambulant cerebral palsy (CP). METHODS: Parents of children with non-ambulant CP who were offered hip surgery for their child's hip displacement, were surveyed and completed the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS). Guided by the Ottawa Decision Support Framework, potential factors associated with decisional conflict were evaluated. Parents were approached to participate in a semi-structured interview guided by Interpretive Description to explore their decision-making experiences. RESULTS: Eleven parents completed the survey and 4 (36.4%) had DCS scores ≥ 25. Nine of 11 parents participated in semi-structured interviews. Themes included: Focus on Future Quality of Life; Processing Time; Necessity of Surgery; and the Importance of Information. Parents indicated key strategies to minimize uncertainty and support them in decision-making included providing ample deliberation time and understandable and accessible information with opportunities for questions. CONCLUSION: Approximately one-third of parents experience decisional conflict associated with the decision for hip surgery. Healthcare professionals can support parents by assisting parents to focus on their child's quality of life and goals of care while providing ample information and time for decision-making.
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 | 0.004 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".