The Lived Experience of Anxiety Among Late Adolescents During High School
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To gain an understanding of everyday anxiety among late adolescents during high school. DESIGN: An interpretive phenomenological approach was utilized. A purposive sample of eight males and females in late adolescence with everyday anxiety were interviewed. METHOD: Individual interviews were conducted. Data analysis was undertaken throughout the research study by utilizing a thematic analysis of text in which themes emerged to understand the lived experience of everyday anxiety among late adolescents during high school. FINDINGS: The study revealed themes reflective of the lived body in time and space and in relation with others. The three themes were (a) the embodied experience of anxiety with the subtheme of the body and mind responds; (b) feeling uncomfortable in the lived space of school with the subthemes of the lived relations of bullying, the internal/external space of isolation, and the constant pressure to perform well; and (c) life at home with the subthemes of the lived space of home, the lived relations of pressure from parents, and life will get better. CONCLUSIONS: Nurses need to provide holistic care for late adolescents experiencing everyday anxiety by focusing on healing the whole person through the unity of body, mind, emotion, spirit, and environment.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".