Contributors to patient engagement in primary health care: perceptions of patients with obesity
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
BACKGROUND: Patients with obesity are at risk for treatment avoidance and nonadherence. Factors that contribute to engagement in primary health care for patients with obesity are not fully understood. AIM: The purpose of this pilot study was to identify issues associated with engagement in primary health care for patients with obesity. METHOD: Using qualitative methodology, 11 patients with a mean body mass index of 40.8 kg/m(2) registered with a primary health care practice were interviewed. Conventional content analysis was used to identify factors that contribute to engagement in primary health care. RESULTS: Barriers and facilitators to engagement in primary health care were categorized into the following themes: availability of resources, importance of the relationship, meaningful communication, feeling judged, lack of privacy, poor communication and limited provider knowledge about obesity. CONCLUSION: Obesity was identified as a health condition that requires additional considerations for patient engagement in their health care.
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 | 0.011 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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