‘One sip won't do any harm . . .’: Temptation among women with inflammatory bowel disease/irritable bowel syndrome to engage in negative dietary behaviours, despite the consequences to their health
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this research was to explore the dietary lived experiences of university-aged women suffering from inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). This paper will address the decision-making process used by these women when contemplating the consumption of dietary temptations, despite the associated negative consequences. This phenomenological study was guided by heuristic inquiry. A purposive sample of eight women, between the ages of 18 and 23 years, who were living with IBD or IBS were recruited via postings and word-of-mouth. The findings indicate that these women occasionally felt compelled to give into dietary temptations, despite the consequences to their health. The decision-making process they used when considering these negative health behaviours involved three personally controlled parameters. These three parameters included: assessing the cost-benefit relationship before engaging in these behaviours; having a physical and/or psychological reliance on medications to treat resulting symptoms; and through controlling the timing and surroundings in which they indulged in these negative dietary behaviours. The practical implications for health-care professionals treating patients with IBD or IBS are discussed.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".