Adolescents’ Perspectives on Living and Growing up with Treacher Collins Syndrome: A Qualitative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study explored the experiences and essences of growing up and living with Treacher Collins syndrome (TCS) from an adolescent perspective. DESIGN: A qualitative approach using the long interview method was used to explore the adolescents' experiences. Semistructured interviews and peer debriefing techniques were used to gather and verify data with each participant. PARTICIPANTS: A purposive sampling technique was used to recruit a sample of six adolescents with TCS, ranging in age from 12 to 18 years, who received care from a craniofacial center in a large pediatric hospital. RESULTS: The themes central to the adolescents' experiences were balancing sameness and difference and the journey toward social and self-acceptance. Five subthemes further described this experience: reconstructing perceptions of others; making meaning of the difference; forming friendships and fitting in; handling staring and teasing; and excelling. CONCLUSIONS: The study group described good psychosocial adjustment, experienced an increasing acceptance of self, TCS, and social acceptance over time and demonstrated resilient adaptive strategies (optimism, motivation, and positive meaning making). They were, however, also challenged by the social stigma associated with difference and by the challenges of finding a good fit in their school environments in meeting unique needs, particularly in their early grades. This study highlights the value of using a qualitative research approach in furthering our understanding of the experiences of children and youth with facial differences.
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 | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".