Pediatricians Overestimate Importance of Physical Symptoms Upon Children’s Health Concerns
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the importance of issues of concern ranked by physicians and children with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). MATERIALS AND METHODS: An item list consisting of 96 items-of-concern, identified by individual interviews and focus group sessions with 81 children with IBD, was administered to a second group of children with IBD (n = 117) asking them to rate the importance of each item to their lives on a 7-point scale. Twenty-one pediatric gastroenterologists experienced with treating children with IBD were asked to mark on the same questionnaire how important they thought each item was to their patients. RESULTS: Of the top 10 most important items identified by children with IBD only two were ranked in the top 10 by physicians. Most striking was the item: "having to take medication," which was scored number 3 by the children and did not appear in the top 50 of physicians. Physicians significantly overestimated the importance of four IBD symptoms (bothered by diarrhea, embarrassed by bad odor, worried about having accident in pants, and worries about passing gas) whereas they underestimated the importance of three other items (bothered by having to take medicines, worries about future health problems, and worries about weight). CONCLUSIONS: Physicians' views of what issues and concerns are most important to children with IBD differ from those stated by the children themselves. Physicians overestimate the importance of physical symptoms. Children should be included in the development phase of instruments assessing health perceptions.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".