Psychological and Behavioral Reactions to Rheumatoid Arthritis from Appearance of Initial Symptoms to After Definitive Diagnosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to qualitatively examine psychological and behavioral reactions to rheumatoid arthritis (RA) from the appearance of initial symptoms to after definitive diagnosis. Between February 2011 and August 2011, subjects were recruited by introduction from one patient group and four medical institutions (general hospitals). Twenty patients (mean age: 56.5±10.8 years) provided written consent to participate in the study. We conducted semi-structured interviews with the patients, asking about thoughts, feelings, and conditions from the appearance of initial symptoms to after definitive diagnosis. In order to qualitatively examine patients' psychological and behavioral reactions, we conducted summarizing content analysis. At onset, patients experienced the appearance as well as disappearance of pain. Moreover, patients saw things optimistically. While they mentioned "I don't know what has happened," their only exploratory efforts were to "look up RA in books." At the time of their first visit to a medical institution, patients came to harbor worries and anxieties. They transitioned to consultation behavior, saying, "I'll visit a specialized medical institution." Furthermore, after definitive diagnosis, patients newly came to have emotions and thoughts such as mistrust or a sense of relief regarding doctors and medical professionals, and depression, worry, anxiety, or relief regarding illness.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".