Exploring peer mentoring in pediatric transition: Perspectives of different stakeholders about accompanying patients in gastroenterology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The literature identifies several issues in the pediatric transition, such as the lack of coordination between pediatric and adult settings and young patients who are not exercising independence in the self-management of their disease. The objective of this study is to explore the potential for a pediatric transition program in gastroenterology, introducing an accompanying patient program to support the transition. A qualitative case study was conducted, including semi-structured focus groups and individual interviews with each group involved in the pediatric transition between two centres in Quebec. A thematic analysis of the collected data was performed using QDA Miner v5.1. In addition to the barriers documented in the literature, such as patients’ poor knowledge of their disease, developmental immaturity and low level of independence, our analysis found that adolescents appear to be quite indifferent to their disease and to the transition. Once they are in an adult health centre, they develop an awareness of the disease’s impact on their lives and would appreciate having support from a peer. In contrast, parents experience considerable anxiety before this transition, and would like to be in contact with other parents. Professionals, for their part, are open to the idea of establishing a peer support program to fill certain gaps in how transfers are organized. One way to improve the transition, as suggested by our respondents, is to set up a peer support program that should evolve over time, being initially implemented for the parents and then for the young adults. Experience Framework This article is associated with the Patient, Family & Community Engagement lens of The Beryl Institute Experience Framework. (http://bit.ly/ExperienceFramework) Access other PXJ articles related to this lens. Access other resources related to this lens.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".