MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7097306367

QUALITATIVE HEALTH RESEARCH / May 2002Beck / RELEASING THE PAUSE BUTTON Releasing the Pause Button: Mothering Twins During the First Year of Life

2016· article· en· W7097306367 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAssisted Reproductive Technology and Twin Pregnancy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionGrounded theoryQualitative researchSocial supportMultiple birthLongitudinal studyInfant mortality
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this grounded theory study was to investigate the basic social psychological problem mothers of twins experience during the first year after delivery and the process they use to resolve this fundamental problem. Life on hold was the basic social psychological prob-lem that mothers of twins experienced during the first year of their twins ’ lives. Releasing the pause button was the four-stage process mothers progressed through as they attempted to resume their own lives. These four phases were (a) draining power, (b) pausing own life, (c) striving to reset, and (d) resuming own life. The most vulnerable period for mothers of twins is the first 3 months postpartum. Intensive interventions need to be in place to support women during this time. Currently, the United States is experiencing the largest number of multiplebirths in recorded history. This upward trend in multiple births began in the 1970s and has increased steadily since that time. Over the last 2 decades, the inci-dence of twin births has increased by 33 % and the number of higher order multiple births by 178 % (DeLisi, 1999). During this same period, triplet-plus births increased 7 times the rate of single births. Contributing to this dramatic rise in multiple births is in vitro fertilization. Tough, Greene, Svenson, and Belik (2000), for example, reported that in vitro fertilization accounted for 21 % of the twins born in Alberta, Canada, between 1994 and 1996. This multiple-birth explosion presents nursing with the challenge of providing optimal care for these high-risk families (Bowers, 1998). Nurses, however, must first have knowledge of the unique problems and needs of multiple-birth families before they can design and implement interventions specific to these unique health care problems. The purpose of this grounded theory study was to investigate (a) the nature of the specific social psychological problem that multiple-birth mothers encounter during the first year after delivery and (b) the process they use to resolve this fundamental problem.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.027
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.143

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0270.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0120.010
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.131
GPT teacher head0.411
Teacher spread0.280 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAssisted Reproductive Technology and Twin PregnancyFrench-language works237,207