The Information Needs and Experiences of People Living With Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices: Qualitative Content Analysis of Reddit Posts
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) are used to treat a range of cardiovascular diseases and can lead to substantial clinical improvements. However, studies evaluating patients' experiences of living with these devices are sparse and have focused mainly on implantable cardioverter defibrillators. In addition, there has been limited evaluation of how people living with a CIED use social media to gain insight into their condition. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to analyze posts from web-based communities called subreddits on the website Reddit, intended for people living with a CIED, to characterize the informational needs and experiences of patients. METHODS: Reddit was systematically searched for appropriate subreddits, and we found 1 subreddit that could be included in the analysis. A Python-based web scraping script using the Reddit application programming interface was used to extract posts from this subreddit. Each post was individually screened for relevancy, and a register of participants' demographic information was created. Conventional qualitative content analysis was used to inductively classify the qualitative data collected into codes, subcategories, and overarching categories. RESULTS: Of the 484 posts collected using the script, 186 were excluded, resulting in 298 posts from 196 participants being included in the analysis. The median age of the participants who reported this was 33 (IQR 22.0-39.5; range 17-72) years, and the majority had a permanent pacemaker. The content analysis yielded 5 overarching categories: use of the subreddit by participants, questions and experiences related to the daily challenges of living with a CIED, physical sequelae of CIED implantation, psychological experiences of living with a CIED, and questions and experiences related to health care while living with a CIED. These categories provided insight into the diverse experiences and informational needs of participants living with a CIED. The data predominantly represented the experiences of younger and more physically active participants. CONCLUSIONS: Social media provides a platform through which people living with a CIED can share information and provide support to their peers. Participants generally sought information about the experiences of others living with a CIED. This was often done to help overcome a range of challenges faced by participants, including the need to adapt to living with a CIED, difficulties with navigating health care, psychological difficulties, and various aversive physical sequelae. These challenges may be particularly difficult for younger and physically active people. Health care professionals may leverage peer support and other aid to help people overcome the challenges they face while living with a CIED.
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,009 | 0,025 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,005 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,005 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».