Adults Living with Type 1 Diabetes, Reflections of their Youth: A Phenomenological Study.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Type 1 diabetes is a chronic medical condition. Effective illness management requires numerous, continuous self-care procedures to ensure a healthy life free of complications. This study asks, what do adults with type 1 diabetes recall about living with a chronic health condition during their youth? By interviewing adults about the different types of relationships and the experiences they had in their youth, the research examines if relationships influence diabetes self-care. Using a phenomenological approached called the Vancouver School of Phenomenology, the researcher drew themes from nine participant interviews. These include: diabetes knowledge, the impacts of diabetes, constructive and deconstructive factors in relationships, and self-awareness and identity in youth and adults with type 1 diabetes. In the sample, this particular composition of participants displayed characteristics that were not consistent with the majority of literature findings regarding persons living with type 1 diabetes. As a result, the data in this study revealed that relationships, and being highly motivated, organized, capable, cognitively intact and functional within the realities of daily life plays a critical role in diabetes self-care and this role changes and evolves over time.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".