MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2743740065 · doi:10.1186/s13690-017-0222-8

Understanding the links between resilience and type-2 diabetes self-management: a qualitative study in South Australia

2017· article· en· W2743740065 on OpenAlex
Anne Wilson, Darlene McNaughton, Samantha B. Meyer, Paul Ward

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

VenueArchives of Public Health · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicResilience and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersFlinders University
KeywordsPsychological resilienceSelf-managementCoping (psychology)Social supportDisadvantagePsychologyGerontologyMedicineClinical psychologySocial psychologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Research conducted by Ward, Muller, Tsourtos, et al. (Soc Sci Med 72(7):1140-1148, 2011) has led to the development of the psycho-social interactive model of resilience, which reveals the interaction between individual resilience factors (i.e. coping, confidence and self esteem) and external resilience environments (i.e. employment, supportive family environments and health promoting policies) in facilitating the development of resilience. This present study explored the utility of this model of resilience for understanding how people self-manage type-2 diabetes. METHODS: Data were collected via 14 semi-structured life-history interviews with women and men living with type-2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Participants varied according to socio-demographics (gender, age, education level, income) and were recruited based on their self-reported management (or lack thereof) of T2DM. RESULTS: The inter-play of internal traits and external resources with additive and subtractive resilience strategies were consistent with the psycho-social interactive model of resilience. Self-management was influenced by life history. Differences in self-management and material disadvantage were also identified. Alongside increased disadvantage are higher levels of external barriers to self-management practices. CONCLUSIONS: This paper supports the concepts of additive and subtractive resilience strategies for use with diabetes populations; providing health professionals and policy makers with an increased understanding of how to recognize and foster patient resilience for the improvement of self-care, disease management and ultimately health outcomes.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.213
Threshold uncertainty score0.401

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.291
GPT teacher head0.491
Teacher spread0.200 · 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