MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7114997231 · doi:10.1016/j.jnn.2025.101762

Navigating the burden of caregiving: Transition journey of Black Canadian parents with preterm infants from NICU to home

2025· article· en· W7114997231 on OpenAlexafffundabout

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neonatal Nursing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfant Development and Preterm Care
Canadian institutionsCanadian Foundation for Healthcare ImprovementUniversity of Toronto
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsThematic analysisStressorMental healthFocus groupExploratory researchQualitative researchNeonatal intensive care unitLived experience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Transition from NICU to home is a critical period as many parents begin to take primary responsibility of caring for their preterm infant. But this period of transition impacted by the demands and stress of caring for a fragile infant, is often complicated by limited access to support and resources. These stressors impact parents’ mental wellbeing and responsiveness to infant needs. This study aimed to shed light on the unique journey of Black Canadian parents of preterm infants transitioning from NICU to home. Methods An exploratory qualitative design underpinned by principles of meaningful community engagement was used to explore the experiences of 40 Black Canadian parents of preterm infants. Focus group and interviews were conducted, and data were analyzed using thematic analysis. Findings The findings illuminated the transition journey of Black parents from NICU was shaped by physical, emotional, financial strain and mental health burden of caregiving in the face of inadequate follow-up care and support. Conclusion This study underscores the need for developing targeted programs and services to support and promote the wellbeing of Black Canadian parents after they transition home .

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.471
Threshold uncertainty score0.633

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neonatal NursingSame topicInfant Development and Preterm CareFrench-language works237,207