Qualitative research in teen experiences living with food‐induced anaphylaxis: A meta‐aggregation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To describe the central experiences of teens living with food-induced anaphylaxis as a first step in responding to healthcare needs in this population. BACKGROUND: As prevalence of allergy increases and commonly outgrown allergies persist longer, chronic management for teens becomes increasingly important. Synthesizing existing research helps to recognize management needs specific to teens with food allergy. DESIGN: Meta-aggregation for qualitative systematic review, to create synthesis for clinical improvement; guided by Joanna Briggs Institute methods and their Qualitative Assessment and Review Instrument. DATA SOURCES: Seven relevant databases were searched for original qualitative research July 2015; 10 studies (published 2007-2015) met inclusion criteria. REVIEW METHODS: Both authors undertook critical appraisal, with consensus by discussion. Findings from line-by-line extraction were grouped into categories and syntheses. In studies with mixed populations, we included only teens (age 12-19) with food-induced anaphylaxis. RESULTS: We developed three syntheses from nine categories and 64 subcategories to reflect central experiences of teens with food-induced anaphylaxis, including: (1) defining the allergic self; (2) finding a balance and (3) controlling the uncontrollable. The syntheses encompass importance of allergic identity/understanding, difficulties in coping with burdens of food allergy and reflect the complex risk interactions teens must negotiate in social contexts. CONCLUSION: There is a need to respect teens as active participants in managing food-induced anaphylaxis, while recognizing that social expectations and a lack of public awareness/safety can dangerously affect one's needs and decisions. This helps broaden how we conceptualize the needs of teens living with food-induced anaphylaxis, informing ongoing care and management.
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 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 | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".