MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4243512127 · doi:10.24124/2015/bpgub1679

The role of family nurse practitioners : promoting oral medication adherence to maintenance treatment among adolescents with inflammatory bowel disease

2015· dissertation· en· W4243512127 on OpenAlexaff
LianJing Cui

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAdolescent and Pediatric Healthcare
Canadian institutionsThompson Rivers University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePsychosocialIntervention (counseling)Inflammatory bowel diseasePsychological interventionMaintenance therapyMedication adherenceDiseasePatient educationHealth maintenanceFamily medicineNursingPhysical therapyPsychiatryHealth careInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The role of family nurse practitioners (FNPs) in promoting medication adherence in adolescents with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has not been established. This project provides intervention strategies that FNPs can use to promote oral medication adherence to maintenance treatment in adolescents with IBD. This is a critical need because non-adherence to maintenance therapy is the most significant factor associated with relapses of IBD and a serious health issue in adolescents with IBD. There are no current best practice guidelines in promoting adherence to maintenance medications in IBD patients. Findings from the literature review suggest that non-adherence to maintenance therapy is complex and multi-factorial. No single intervention strategy has been shown to be effective for all patients and conditions. However, individually tailored interventions that attend to behavioural, education and psychosocial factors appear promising. The bio-psychosocial model is used as a conceptual framework to examine the factors affecting medication adherence and to explore the intervention strategies for improving medication adherence. Findings of this project are limited by the paucity of research on medication adherence in adolescents with IBD. Implications and recommendations for family nurse practitioner practice, education and research are discussed.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.362 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdolescent and Pediatric Healthcare→French-language works237,207→