Parent Experiences Caring for a Child With Bronchiolitis: A Qualitative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background:Bronchiolitis is an acute lower respiratory infection, with significant impacts on children and families and strains on the health care system. Understanding parents’ experiences and information needs caring for a child with bronchiolitis is crucial to highlight misconceptions or issues contributing to the high burden. The objective of this qualitative study was to describe parents’ experiences caring for a child with bronchiolitis.Methods:Qualitative description guided this study. Participants were recruited from the Stollery Children’s Hospital emergency department (ED), a specialized pediatric ED in a major Canadian urban center. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 15 parents.Results:Five major themes were identified: (a) their children’s symptoms and behaviors, (b) bronchiolitis affects the entire family, (c) factors influencing parent’s decision to go to ED, (d) ED experience for parents and their children, and (e) bronchiolitis treatment and management. Interviews revealed bronchiolitis has significant effects on both children and families and parents are generally unaware of bronchiolitis symptoms, treatment, and management.Conclusions:Our study highlights that parents have knowledge deficits when it comes to recognizing the presence and severity of bronchiolitis symptoms. Parents would benefit from having more evidence-based resources to enhance their knowledge about the nature of bronchiolitis.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".