Learning to live with nephrotic syndrome: experiences of adult patients and parents of children with nephrotic syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: People living with nephrotic syndrome (NS) need to develop an in-depth understanding of their condition in order to participate in treatment decisions, develop self-management skills and integrate illness into daily life. However, the learning needs of adult patients and parents of children with NS are unknown. We therefore explored patient and parent perspectives on learning needs related to NS as part of a larger study to develop a shared learning tool for NS. Methods: Qualitative data were collected using semistructured focus groups and individual interviews with adult patients (n = 22) and parents of children with NS (n = 25). Results: The complexity of NS and its treatment made decision making challenging, as patients/parents often had to assimilate information about a condition that is poorly understood. Specific informational needs related to understanding the diagnosis and treatment approaches as well as learning to manage NS were identified. Difficulty in getting accurate information often made learning challenging. The importance of learning to monitor their condition, including understanding triggers that might precipitate a relapse, was highlighted, underscoring the need for individualized approaches to ensure unique learning needs are addressed. Conclusions: Our findings reveal some of the unique concerns of people with NS given its uncertain course and the limited information available specific to NS. These results suggest the need for shared communication between the patient/parents and providers to elicit the patient's/parents' understanding of NS and to support them in meeting their unique learning needs.
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 | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".