Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study sought to create an in depth understanding of the impact of living with narcolepsy (a disorder of excessive daytime sleepiness) through qualitative research.The study used an essentially phenomenological methodology.Twenty-seven participants (18 females, 9 males, Mean age = 54.30,range = 26-90 years) were recruited from medical files in Canada and the narcolepsy support group in Australia.Data were collected via an open-ended narrative inviting the informant to focus on the impact of the disorder and analysed thematically.The issue of social context emerged as a key theme in understanding perceptions of the impact of living with narcolepsy.A secondary theme was that narcolepsy was experienced as an invisible illness.Thus the impact of living with narcolepsy is embedded in the need to maintain acceptable social functioning (within family, friendship and work relationships) and, related to this, cognitive functioning.This is complicated by the often indistinguishable nature of the symptoms from behaviors that people without narcolepsy experience.Health professionals need to understand that narcolepsy differs from other illnesses in that its key impact is a disruption to normal social functioning.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".