“It’s not something you expect a 15-year-old to be sad about”: Sources of Uncertainty and Strategies of Uncertainty Management among Adolescent Women Who Have Experienced Miscarriage
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
Approximately 10%-25% of adolescent pregnancies end in miscarriage, yet we know little about the experience of miscarriage among women in this age group. To better understand the medical and psychosocial challenges faced by adolescent women who experience a miscarriage, we conducted interviews with 31 college-aged women who had experienced a miscarriage between the ages of 15 and 19. We analyzed interview transcripts using qualitative descriptive analysis and found that adolescent women experience various medical (e.g., insufficient medical knowledge, unknown etiology), personal (e.g., competing identities, lack of autonomy in decision-making), and relational (e.g., emotional invalidation, relational insecurity) sources of uncertainty in miscarriage in ways that are unique to the population of adolescent women. Women in our sample appraised their uncertainty positively and negatively (sometimes simultaneously) and reported using a variety of management strategies to facilitate their desired level of uncertainty, including information seeking, avoidance, health behavior change, and reframing the miscarriage.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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