Living with Diabetes: Experiences of Inner and Outer Sources of Beliefs in Women with Low Socioeconomic Status
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine the life experiences of nineteen Thai women of low socioeconomic status who were living with type 2 diabetes. A qualitative research design was conducted, and the women were identified by the snowball technique. Data was collected through semi-structured interviews, and processes of induction and abstraction were used for data analysis. The theme "keeping equilibrium of one's mind" involved two sub-themes: experiencing an unpredictable future and being empowered by emerged beliefs. The first sub-theme encompassed worries concerning health and fears of being a burden to one's family. The second sub-theme comprised the experiences of continuing life without being conquered by the disease and believing in the natural law described in Buddhist teachings. These findings revealed that participants could maintain a balance among their concerns through empowerment by inner and outer sources of beliefs, particularly in Buddhist teachings. Despite the vulnerable situations caused by diabetes and low socioeconomic status, the women remained calm, with a consciousness to continue their lives with the disease. The Buddhist views on life, specifically natural law, assisted them to consider life with diabetes as simply a natural course. Buddhism served as a spiritual refuge and helped the women to cope with their psychological burden from diabetes. These findings may reflect the need for health care professionals to provide more holistic care that would assist patients to live with their disease. Buddhist beliefs can be used as a tool to assist Thai patients to empower themselves successfully.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".