Stories of chronic kidney disease: listening for the unsayable
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: To explore individuals' stories of chronic kidney disease, particularly those aspects of experience that are difficult to discuss using language (i.e. unsayable). BACKGROUND: Chronic kidney disease is continuous, but it is also life-threatening and sometimes people ask difficult questions about life and death that can be challenging and for some, impossible to discuss. These 'unsayables' are the focus of this article. The unsayable may reside both within and beyond language. Careful analysis of narratives of illness for sayable and unsayable aspects of the experience can help illuminate new areas of concern for people with chronic kidney disease. DESIGN: Narrative inquiry, located in a social constructionist framework, guided this study. METHODS: Secondary data analysis was conducted with 46 in-depth interviews (collected between 2008-2011) with 14 people living with chronic kidney disease. FINDINGS: Through narrative thematic analysis, we identify that the unsayable includes the following five themes: living with death, embodied experiences that were difficult to language, that which was unthinkable, unknowable mystery and that which was untold/unheard. Whereas the first four themes attend to that which is unsayable for people living with chronic kidney disease, the last theme acknowledges that which is unsayable to people living with chronic kidney disease. CONCLUSION: Not all experiences of illness can be explicitly articulated in language. Listening for both the sayable and unsayable aspects of life with chronic and life-threatening illness is an important nursing role.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".