MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2165694002 · doi:10.1177/1742395314520769

Women’s accounts of help-seeking in early rheumatoid arthritis from symptom onset to diagnosis

2014· article· en· W2165694002 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Anne Townsend, Catherine L. Backman, Paul Adam, Linda Li

Bibliographic record

VenueChronic Illness · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRheumatoid Arthritis Research and Therapies
Canadian institutionsArthritis Research Centre of CanadaUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of British Columbia Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsNarrativeRheumatoid arthritisThematic analysisHelp-seekingMedicinePsychologyNarrative inquiryQualitative researchPsychiatrySociologyMental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: As interest in gender and health grows, the notion that women are more likely than men to consult doctors is increasingly undermined as more complex understandings of help seeking and gender emerge. While men's reluctance to seek help is associated with practices of masculinities, there has been less consideration of women's help-seeking practices. Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic disease that predominantly affects women and requires prompt treatment but considerable patient-based delays persist along the care pathway. This paper examines women's accounts of help seeking in early RA from symptom onset to diagnosis. METHODS: We conducted in-depth interviews with 37 women with RA <12 months in Canada. Analysis was based on a constant comparison, thematic approach informed by narrative analysis. RESULTS: The women's accounts featured masculine practices associated with men's help-seeking. The women presented such behaviours as relational, e.g. rooted in family socialisation and a determination to maintain roles and 'normal' life. DISCUSSION: Our findings raise questions about how far notions of gender operate to differentiate men and women's help seeking and may indicate more similarities than differences. Recognising this has implications for policy and practice initiatives for both men and women.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.172
Threshold uncertainty score0.343

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0110.011
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2014
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChronic IllnessSame topicRheumatoid Arthritis Research and TherapiesFrench-language works237,207