Assessing the Informational Needs of Adolescents with a Genetic Condition: What Do They Want to Know?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adolescence is a period of challenges that can be more stressful for someone with a genetic condition. The purpose of this descriptive pilot study was to assess the informational needs of adolescents with a genetic condition. To our knowledge, this is the first study that has attempted to identify these needs. A convenience sample of adolescents between 12-19 years of age with either phenylketonuria or congenital adrenal hyperplasia and who had not previously received genetic counseling was recruited. Recruitment ended once the themes were saturated (n=17). A twenty item open/close-ended questionnaire was used to assess participants' knowledge of their genetic condition, what they wanted to know about their condition and in what manner. Almost all of the adolescents knew the name and genetic basis of their condition while most were aware of the risk of recurrence in a future pregnancy. Parents and doctors respectively, were identified as the primary and secondary sources of genetic information. Despite their evolving independence, almost all of the participants favoured receiving medical information with their parents present. The majority of participants felt that patients should begin receiving genetic information before the age of 12 years. Thematic analysis revealed that adolescents wanted to understand the science behind their condition, how their condition affects them, and how to manage it. The results highlight (i) the importance that adolescents place on parental involvement in their medical care (ii) that adolescents would like information about the genetics of their condition at a much younger age than when they usually receive genetic counseling and (iii) the benefits that can be gained by this patient population from receiving genetic counseling.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".