Experiences of self‐care during the COVID‐19 pandemic among individuals with rheumatoid arthritis: A qualitative study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to explore the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on self-care of individuals living with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Guided by a constructivist, qualitative design, we conducted one-to-one in-depth telephone interviews between March and October 2020 with participants with RA purposively sampled for maximum variation in age, sex and education, who were participating in one of two ongoing randomized-controlled trials. An inductive, reflexive thematic analysis approach was used. RESULTS: Twenty-six participants (aged 27-73 years; 23 females) in British Columbia, Canada were interviewed. We identified three themes: (1) Adapting to maintain self-care describes how participants took measures to continue self-care activities while preventing virus transmissions. While spending more time at home, some participants reported improved self-care. (2) Managing emotions describes resilience-building strategies such as keeping perspective, positive reframing and avoiding negative thoughts. Participants described both letting go and maintaining a sense of control to accommodate difficulties and emotional responses. (3) Changing communication with health professionals outlined positive experiences of remote consultations with health professionals, particularly if good relationships had been established prepandemic. CONCLUSION: The insights gained may inform clinicians and researchers on ways to support the self-care strategies of individuals with RA and other chronic illnesses during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. The findings reveal opportunities to further examine remote consultations to optimize patient engagement and care. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This project is jointly designed and conducted with patient partners in British Columbia, Canada. Patient partners across the United Kingdom also played in a key role in providing interpretations of themes during data analysis.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 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".