MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Adherence to clean intermittent self‐catheterization procedures: determinants explored

2007· article· en· W2128807713 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Nursing · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUrinary Bladder and Prostate Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institute of Steel Construction
KeywordsMedicineNursingPsychologyIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS & OBJECTIVES: The aim of the current study was to explore factors that hinder or promote adherence to clean intermittent self-catheterization (CISC) procedures in adults. BACKGROUND: Clean intermittent self-catherization is associated with favourable patient outcomes, but adherence to the procedure is not addressed in the international literature. METHODS: Relevant factors were explored in two studies. The first study (n = 10) addressed mastery and short-term adherence, whereas the second study (n = 20) addressed long-term adherence in these patients. Determinants of patient adherence were derived from pre-structured interviews with patients, using a content-analysis procedure. RESULTS: A list of 16 determinants of mastery and short-term adherence and a list of 12 determinants of long-term adherence was found. Most of these determinants were found in both older (>or=65 years of age) and younger patients. However, five determinants of mastery and short-term adherence and six determinants of long-term adherence were specific to patients under the age of 65. CONCLUSION: Our findings give a first insight into CISC adherence. General determinants of adherence relate to knowledge, complexity of the procedure, misconceptions, fears, shame, motivation and quality and continuity of professional care. Furthermore integrating CISC in everyday life can be difficult. In younger patients, availability of materials, physical impairments and resistance to a sickness role can further compromise adherence. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Issues of knowledge, fears, motivation and potential psychological impact of performing CISC should be addressed prior to deciding on CISC and instructing patients. Follow-up care should be improved to include re-evaluations of skills, discussing adherence, integrating CISC in daily activities and general coping issues.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.931
Threshold uncertainty score0.337

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.490
Teacher spread0.380 · 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