4.6 Article

Trajectory of parental hope when a child has difficult-to-treat cancer: a prospective qualitative study

期刊

PSYCHO-ONCOLOGY
卷 22, 期 11, 页码 2436-2444

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/pon.3305

关键词

pediatric oncology; caregivers; parental hope; cancer; longitudinal design; qualitative methods

资金

  1. Canadian Institutes of Health Research [77735]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

ObjectiveThis prospective and longitudinal study was designed to further our understanding of parental hope when a child is being treated for a malignancy resistant to treatment over three time points during the first year after diagnosis using a qualitative approach to inquiry. MethodsWe prospectively recruited parents of pediatric cancer patients with a poor prognosis who were treated in the Hematology/Oncology Program at a large children's hospital for this longitudinal grounded theory study. Parents were interviewed at three time points: within 3months of the initial diagnosis, at 6months, and at 9months. Data collection and analysis took place concurrently using line-by-line coding. Constant comparison was used to examine relationships within and across codes and categories. ResultsTwo overarching categories defining hope as a positive inner source were found across time, but their frequency varied depending on how well the child was doing and disease progression: future-oriented hope and present-oriented hope. Under future-oriented hope, we identified the following: hope for a cure and treatment success, hope for the child's future, hope for a miracle, and hope for more quality time with child. Under present-oriented hope, we identified hope for day-to-day/moment-to-moment, hope for no pain and suffering, and hope for no complications. ConclusionsFor parents of children with a diagnosis of cancer with a poor prognosis, hope is an internal resource that can be present and future focused. These views fluctuated over time in response to changes in the child's well-being and disease progression. Copyright (c) 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据