Making the shift from unknowing to knowing and living with one's risk for coronary artery disease after having had gestational diabetes mellitus: a grounded theory study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Coronary artery disease (CAD) is a growing cardiovascular issue for women under the age of 55, resulting in poor health outcomes, including mortality. The literature has identified that women possess both traditional and pregnancy-related nontraditional risk factors for CAD. Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is one such risk factor that is on the rise, causing a fourfold increased risk for CAD. Although the connection between the risk of CAD following GDM exists, it remains unclear if, and from whom, when, and how women acquire their knowledge of this risk. It is also uncertain how they come to understand and manage this risk. Furthermore, specific follow-ups for the development of CAD after GDM are not being conducted. We need a clearer understanding of how these women come to know, understand, assign meaning to, manage, and live with this risk before education, screening, and interventions can be developed. Purpose: The purpose of this grounded theory (GT) study was to gain a fuller understanding of the psychosocial process experienced by women who had GDM as they assign meaning to the risk for CAD and make coinciding decisions about their future health and well-being. Methods: This research study was guided by a GT approach. Semi-structured interviews were conducted on women who had GDM and lived in Newfoundland and Labrador (NL). The constant comparative method was used to facilitate data collection and analysis. Results: There were 26 women from NL with a history of GDM who participated in the study. The substantive theory that emerged from the data was Making the Shift from Unknowing to Knowing and Living with One's Risk for CAD After Having had GDM. This substantive theory emerged from three theoretical constructs: 1) Sustaining a Sense of Unknowing About the Risk for CAD Following a Diagnosis of GDM, 2) Knowing One's Risk for CAD Following a Diagnosis of GDM, and 3) Living With One's Risk for CAD Following a Diagnosis of GDM. The findings of the first theoretical construct indicate that women were not informed about their risk for CAD after GDM, during their GDM diagnosis, or after their pregnancy. The findings of the second theoretical construct reveal that the participants did not know they were at risk for CAD after receiving a diagnosis of GDM. The third theoretical construct identifies the barriers and motivators associated with implementing lifestyle and behavioural changes in individuals living with the risk of CAD following a GDM diagnosis. It highlights the need for clinical practice guidelines and follow-up for this cohort. Conclusions: Women living in NL require better education about CAD risk from healthcare professionals (HCPs), who in turn need training to communicate this information effectively. Therefore, improved risk communication by HCPs is crucial. Specific clinical guidelines and screenings should be created for this group to mitigate CAD risk. Additionally, a dedicated women's health center should adopt a sex-and-gender focus with an interdisciplinary team for those with GDM and other risk factors for CAD. Nurses can serve as navigators and educators in this team, ensuring that women's healthcare experiences are recognized.
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 | 0,031 | 0,021 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,009 | 0,016 |
| Communication savante | 0,008 | 0,006 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,007 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,005 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 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 ».