MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Young Adults’ Perceptions of Living With Chronic Inflammatory Bowel Disease

2002· article· en· W2067629823 on OpenAlexaff
Joanne M. Daniel

Bibliographic record

VenueGastroenterology Nursing · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAdolescent and Pediatric Healthcare
Canadian institutionsToronto Rehabilitation Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerceptionInterpersonal communicationInflammatory bowel diseasePerspective (graphical)Qualitative researchPremiseMedicinePsychologyInterpersonal relationshipChronic diseaseDiseaseYoung adultHealth careGerontologyFamily medicineSocial psychologySociologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

King's (1981, 1995b) Theory of Goal Attainment provided the theoretical framework for this qualitative, descriptive study exploring the perceptions of five young adults living with chronic inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Through in-depth interviews, the participants had the opportunity to share their perceptions of what mattered most as they lived the experiences of this illness. The uniqueness and individuality of perceptions, the challenges of chronic bowel disease, recommendations for the future, and participants' expectations of healthcare professionals were explored. Persons with chronic IBD are faced with many life-disrupting challenges that profoundly affect their personal, interpersonal, and social systems. This research study supported the premise that understanding the patient's perspective and reaching perceptual accuracy through human-to-human interaction is critical to healthcare outcomes and achievement of the young adult's health goals.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.301 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations57
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGastroenterology NursingSame topicAdolescent and Pediatric HealthcareFrench-language works237,207