Illness conversations: Self-disclosure among children and youth with chronic illnesses
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Illness disclosure refers to when individuals with chronic illnesses make decisions to tell others about their disease. There is a lack of research on the complexity of disclosure among children and youth with chronic illnesses. We conducted a review of the literature to understand the process of disclosure among children and youth with chronic illnesses in the context of peer-based relationships. METHODS: A narrative review was completed using three databases. The search yielded 11 articles that utilized various research designs. RESULTS: Most of the literature was qualitative in nature. Most children and youth engaged in non-disclosure and concealment which is born out of fears of discrimination. Fewer children and youth engaged in unplanned disclosure, passive disclosure, partial disclosure, and open disclosure. Children and youth carefully consider who they are disclosing to and perceptions about other peoples' responses strongly impact disclosure. Children and youth disclose verbally, behaviorally, and in written form. Disclosure is associated with both positive and negative effects, such as confidence, self-advocacy, and distress. DISCUSSION: Health providers and researchers should critically support disclosure and empower children and youth with the resources they need to be agents in their own disclosure decisions.
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.
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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it