MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2395512644 · doi:10.1097/jnn.0000000000000178

Hard to Swallow

2015· article· en· W2395512644 on OpenAlex
Kori A. LaDonna, Wilma J. Koopman, Susan L. Ray, Shannon L. Venance

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience Nursing · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAmyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Research
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
FundersNational Multiple Sclerosis Society
KeywordsDysphagiaApathyMedicineSwallowingWeaknessLived experienceHealth carePsychologyPsychiatryClinical psychologyCognitionPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Myotonic dystrophy (DM1), a genetic, multisystemic disorder, is the most prevalent adult form of muscular dystrophy. Dysphagia is a common symptom that may be difficult to diagnose and treat and can be associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Preexisting cognitive impairment or apathy, both well described in the DM1 literature, may contribute to management challenges. Caregivers may become important for managing a family member's swallowing dysfunction. Although clinicians place great importance on swallowing difficulties, it is unknown how dysphagia impacts patients and their caregivers. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to explore the experiences of caregivers living with those with DM1and dysphagia. METHODS: An interpretive phenomenological approach was used to study the lived experience of six caregivers for individuals with DM1 and dysphagia. Audio-taped semistructured interviews were used for data collection, and data were analyzed using van Manen's steps for phenomenological analysis. FINDINGS: Despite the potential for dysphagia to cause morbidity and mortality in individuals with DM1, caregivers did not describe this as a problematic symptom. Instead, they highlighted more debilitating symptoms like fatigue or weakness and discussed the caregiving experience. Themes pertaining to participants' lived body, lived relationality, lived time, and lived space were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Healthcare providers need to balance issues of clinical concern with those that are important for individuals and their family members. Assessments of caregiver knowledge and burden at each clinic visit may be warranted.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.964
Threshold uncertainty score0.192

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.192
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.217 · 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