Patients’ Perspectives on the Psychological Impact of Inflammatory Arthritis and Meeting the Associated Support Needs: Open‐Ended Responses in a Multi‐Centre Survey
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
OBJECTIVES: Psychological support for inflammatory arthritis is recommended in rheumatology treatment guidelines. Previous research found that high numbers of patients would access such support but that provision is often inconsistent and inadequate. The present study explored patients' perspectives on the nature of the psychological impact of inflammatory arthritis and how to meet the associated support needs. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted, using questionnaires which included three open-ended questions about helpful and unhelpful psychological support. The questionnaires were administered to 1,080 patients at six regional rheumatology units across England, and 1,200 members of a national patient charity. RESULTS: A total of 1,210 (53%) patients completed the questionnaire, with 779 (64%) responding to the open-ended questions: 80% female; mean age 59 years (12.6); disease duration <5 years (40%), 5-10 years (20%), >10 years (40%). Data were analysed using a hybrid content analysis. Four categories emerged: challenges of an altered life course (negative emotions, isolation and loneliness, a dysfunctional body, loss, strained relationships, and fears for the future); poor communication (feeling unheard, clinicians' reluctance to address psychological issues, a lack of help to manage pain and fatigue, and struggling to ask for help); understood by others (sharing with people who have arthritis, supportive family and friends, whole team support, and understanding from clinicians); and acquiring strategies (ways of coping). CONCLUSIONS: Psychological distress was commonplace, and often attributed to fatigue and pain. In addition to peers and family, patients looked to the rheumatology team for validation and support. Further research will address the skills training needs of rheumatology teams to meet patients' psychological support requirements.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| 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