Exploring the Information Needs of Adolescents and Their Parents Throughout the Kidney Transplant Continuum
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Context Adolescents are at higher risk for organ loss than are all other age groups, but no studies have been conducted to examine the specific information needs of adolescents. A better understanding of adolescents' information needs is essential for developing programs tailored to their unique requirements. Objective To explore information needs of adolescents who have undergone kidney transplantation in order to inform development of an education program. Design A qualitative descriptive design was used. Focus groups (n = 2) were conducted by using a semistructured interview guide. Transcribed data were organized into categories that reflected emerging themes by using simple content analysis. Participants and Setting A convenience sample of 8 adolescents (50% female) who varied in age, donor type, and time since transplantation were recruited from a large Canadian tertiary care pediatric center. Results Adolescents articulated that the process of undergoing kidney transplant was very stressful and affected all aspects of their lives. In particular, adolescents identified 4 main stressors: changes in body image, wanting to be normal, pain, and breakdown in communication processes. The 2 strategies that assisted adolescents in coping with these stressors were (1) gaining knowledge about the transplantation process and (2) experiencing understanding through social support. They wanted information provided to them gradually throughout the transplant experience with choices given as to how they receive the information. Conclusion Adolescents were united in their call for information, self-management strategies, and meaningful social support to better manage their kidney transplant and prepare for transition to adult health care.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".