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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to explore the use of narrative as a tool to understand the experience of chronic illness. The study is phenomenological in nature, using elements of grounded theory and social constructionism to consider the data collected. As examples of the issues raised using the narrative approach, the paper describes four themes that were pervasive in the first-person accounts of these individuals: 1. Emotional reaction to the diagnosis--Because of both the form and content in the narratives, these are described as 'peak experiences'; 2. Impact of stress--As a precipitator of symptoms or illness, as an ongoing aggravator of the chronic illness, or as a factor in overall coping with the chronic illness; 3. View of death--Named by all four individuals as it relates to their view of life; 4. Illness meaning--Coined by two of the individuals as 'philosophy of life.' These themes were interpreted in terms of their implications for therapeutic relationships with people with disabilities and chronic illnesses.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it