What can be learned from patient stories about living with the chronicity of heart illness? A narrative inquiry
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patients' illness stories are valuable information that supports person-centred care across the illness trajectory. AIMS: To learn how older South Asian immigrant women experience living with heart illness long after discharge from hospital. METHOD: We used narrative inquiry, a personal experience method that explores and interprets lived and told stories through the three dimensions of experience. DESIGN: Four participants, over the age of sixty, living with heart illness for over ten years, were invited to engage in narrative interview and Narrative Reflective Process. OUTCOMES: Giving patients voice, allows caregivers insight into the human experience of illness beyond hospitalization. Considering the increased migration of people around the globe, this knowledge is significant in provision of person-centred care. IMPLICATIONS: Person-centred care does not end with the hospitalization and outpatient clinics. Inter-disciplinary teams need to reconsider the trajectory of chronic illnesses and the care required throughout, especially for marginalized populations.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it