MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3188140929 · doi:10.2196/22784

Experiences of Children With Osteogenesis Imperfecta in the Co-design of the Interactive Assessment and Communication Tool Sisom OI: Secondary Analysis of Qualitative Design Sessions

2021· article· en· W3188140929 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Maia Siedlikowski, Lianna Curiale, Frank Rauch, Argerie Tsimicalis

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Pediatrics and Parenting · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicConnective tissue disorders research
Canadian institutionsShriners Hospitals for Children - CanadaMcGill University
FundersMedical Research Council
KeywordsFeelingInterviewQualitative researchOsteogenesis imperfectaPsychologyClinical psychologyMedicineSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Children with osteogenesis imperfecta (OI) experience a diversity of symptoms that expose them to difficult physical, mental, and social challenges. Sisom (DHealth) is an interactive assessment and communication tool designed to help children aged 6-12 years with chronic conditions express their symptoms. Recently, the co-design of the Sisom OI paper prototype was launched by seeking the perspectives of end users, including children with OI and their clinicians. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to describe the experiences that children with OI were prompted to share with researchers during the co-design of the Sisom OI paper prototype. METHODS: A secondary analysis of qualitative data was conducted at a university-affiliated, pediatric, orthopedic hospital. The data sources consisted of interview transcripts, drawings, field notes, and observations derived from interviewing 12 children with OI who participated in the co-design of the Sisom OI paper prototype. The themes and subthemes identified from the data sources were generated using qualitative description. RESULTS: Three themes were identified. The first, Relating to Others, described the balance between feeling different versus feeling similar to other children. The subthemes were Common OI Experience, Feeling Different, and Feeling Just Like Others. The second, Relating to Their Condition, described children's positive and negative interactions with their own condition and health care. The subthemes were Understanding Their Condition, Special Relationship with the Hospital, and Difficult Treatments and Procedures. The third, Reflecting on Capabilities, described children's recognition of their strengths and limitations. The subthemes were Perceiving Limitations, Overcoming Isolation, and Celebrating Strengths. CONCLUSIONS: This co-design process provided children with OI the space to not only contribute to the development of the end product but also eloquently describe their experiences. These findings, based on the descriptions given by the children themselves, offer us a unique understanding of what it means to grow up with OI.

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 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)0.001
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 score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.187

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.353 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Pediatrics and ParentingSame topicConnective tissue disorders researchFrench-language works237,207