MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4296782465 · doi:10.1111/petr.14396

Patient and care provider inclusion in the development of an educational graphic novel for heart transplanted teenagers

2022· article· en· W4296782465 on OpenAlexaff
Stephanie Dalmer, Sean Caulfield, Faye Murdoch, Simon Urschel

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Transplantation · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAdolescent and Pediatric Healthcare
Canadian institutionsStollery Children's HospitalAlberta University of the ArtsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNarrativeHealth careResource (disambiguation)PopulationInclusion (mineral)NursingPsychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Teenagers experience high rates of rejection and organ failure after heart transplantation due to non-adherence to medications, poor transition into adult care, and difficulties communicating with adults including healthcare providers. This project aimed to creatively bridge this gap-including teenage patients, their parents, and healthcare providers in the development of a new resource meant to motivate teenage heart-transplant-patients to take interest and ownership of their long-term health. METHODS: Four teenage heart-transplanted patients, four parents, and three healthcare providers provided insight into relevant content for an educational resource through semi-standardized questionnaires and interviews. Their input guided the style and substance of the resource developed under the supervision of Fine Arts professors and the pediatric heart transplant team. RESULTS: Parents and healthcare providers were concerned about teenagers' health choices and lack of perspective while patients were more bothered by parental nagging and being careful about infections than worrying about post-transplant risks. The resource that was developed therefore used subtlety within a narrative medium: a graphic novel that involved mutant worms, secret plots, and daring escapes, to address identified medical concerns and encouragements without triggering teenage resistance to instruction. CONCLUSION: The discrepancies between the priorities of healthcare providers, parents, and teenage heart-transplant-patients illustrate the significance of basing resource-development on input from the target population. We developed the first graphic novel written for teenage heart-transplant-patients with patient input and interdisciplinary cooperation, using the subtlety of a narrative medium as a model for integrating medical content within an appealing, motivational, patient-centered, and age-appropriate resource.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.327 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePediatric TransplantationSame topicAdolescent and Pediatric HealthcareFrench-language works237,207