Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Reluctance to recover may explain poor treatment outcome and high dropout and relapse rates in the treatment of anorexia nervosa (AN). This study systematically explored what AN patients describe as interfering with their wish to recover. METHOD: Two independent samples of women with AN (total N = 36) were interviewed in-depth using a phenomenological study design. Interviews were tape recorded, transcribed and analysed using QSR-NVivo7 (QSR International, Melbourne, Australia) software. RESULTS: Seven core obstacles were found to interfere with informants' wish to recover as follows: (i) 'perceiving judgements'; (ii) 'feeling stuck'; (iii) 'feeling distressed'; (iv) 'denying AN'; (v) 'eating'; (vi) 'gaining weight'; and (vii) 'appreciating the benefits'. CONCLUSION: The wish to recover is an autonomously based, fundamental motivational requirement for becoming ready to change. Understanding factors that contribute to this wish adds to the clinician's toolbox in motivational work with AN patients.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
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 it