MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4366834026 · doi:10.1093/rheumatology/kead104.323

E074 Self-care for rheumatoid arthritis during the COVID-19 pandemic: transferability of Canadian and UK experiences

2023· article· en· W4366834026 sur OpenAlexaffabout
James P. Gavin, Jenny Leese, Smruthi O Ramachandran, Stephanie Therrien, Catherine L. Backman, K. Jasmin, Eileen Davidson, Shanon McQuitty, Alison M. Hoens, Cheryl Koehn, Jo Adams, Linda Li

Notice bibliographique

RevueLara D. Veeken · 2023
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Établissements canadiensUniversity of British ColumbiaResearch CanadaUniversity of Ottawa
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineFocus groupThematic analysisTelehealthContext (archaeology)Health carePublic healthPandemicFamily medicineQualitative researchNursingTelemedicineCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)SociologyDiseaseInternal medicinePolitical science

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Background/Aims The COVID-19 pandemic posed unique challenges for people worldwide in self-caring for their rheumatoid arthritis (RA). COVID-19 also prompted global changes in public health (e.g., vaccination programs and mask wearing) and rheumatology services (e.g., integrating telehealth with in-person healthcare). To facilitate cross-country learning of how to support people with RA to self-care during and post-pandemic, better understanding of individuals’ experiences of self-care in the context of changes in public health and ‘integrated’ healthcare is needed. Our study aimed to explore transferability in experiences of public health measures and telehealth during COVID-19 among individuals with RA in Canada and the UK. Methods Between July and October 2022, online focus groups (90 mins) took place with participants living with RA in the UK. Participants were recruited via social media and professional networks (including Versus Arthritis). Each participant received a report ∼7days before each focus group, with a request to review in advance. The report contained preliminary findings identified through reflexive thematic analysis of interviews (30-70 mins) with thirty-nine participants with RA in British Columbia, Canada (26-86 years; 36 females) between December 2020 and 2021. Nine preliminary themes were identified across three topics: accessing telehealth and in-person healthcare; decision-making around COVID-19 vaccinations and public health measures; and renegotiating ‘the self’. The themes guided the focus groups, wherein UK participants shared their perspectives on each theme arising in the Canadian context. Audio-visual recordings were transcribed verbatim, and transcripts were de-identified. Ongoing directed content analysis of focus group data involves a collaborative approach with patient partners. Results Four focus groups involving thirteen participants (44-81 years;11 females) living across the UK were conducted. Participants had lived with RA for between 3-36 years. Canadian experiences typically resonated with UK participants, with some feeling a sense of unity and sadness that challenges were also experienced by others living with RA beyond their national context. Many UK participants supported preferences expressed by Canadian participants for a ‘hybrid’ healthcare approach to maximise benefits and minimise downsides of telehealth, and in-person consultations post-pandemic. Benefits (e.g., avoiding risk of COVID-19 transmission with telehealth) and disadvantages (e.g., lacking sensitivity/accuracy of in-person assessments) described by Canadian participants also resonated with UK-based participants. Many described how their decision-making on adopting public health measures to maintain their self-care was supported and/or undermined in their local context/community. Conclusion Our findings offer novel insights into the challenges and opportunities experienced by people with RA in their decision-making around public health measures and telehealth during a global pandemic. They also demonstrate some transferability of experiences between the UK and Canada. Insights may serve to inform decision-making for policy and programmes to support self-care (e.g., by integrating telehealth into routine rheumatology practice) across countries during and post-pandemic. Disclosure J. Gavin: None. J. Leese: None. S.O. Ramachandran: None. S. Therrien: None. C. Backman: None. J. Ma: None. E. Davidson: None. S. McQuitty: None. A.M. Hoens: None. C.L. Koehn: None. J. Adams: None. L. Li: None.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,005
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: Qualitatif
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,050
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,362

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0050,013
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0020,003
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0190,009
Communication savante0,0080,003
Science ouverte0,0020,007
Intégrité de la recherche0,0020,003
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0060,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,046
Tête enseignante GPT0,338
Écart entre enseignants0,292 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeQualitatif
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2023
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueLara D. VeekenMême sujetTelemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationTravaux en français237 207