“Not just the asthma”: Understanding the acute asthma experiences of adult women with asthma presenting to the emergency department through photovoice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rationale: Asthma is a common reason for emergency department (ED) presentation. Few studies have explored the experiences of adults during asthma exacerbation, particularly those that necessitate ED care.Objectives: This study explored adults experiences during asthma exacerbation.Methods: A photovoice study was conducted. ED patients presenting for asthma care between the ages of 17-55 years were eligible for the study and recruited in the ED. Participants had 3-4 weeks to take photographs and subsequently completed a one-on-one photo-elicitation interview. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed and thematically analyzed.Measurements and Main Results: Six patients agreed to participate; 2 were lost to follow-up. One primary theme emerged. Specifically, the role of hope and fear, including the tension between them, in their experience of their condition. Hope and fear permeated all aspects of experience, including the following subthemes: 1) participants adopting the roles of advocate and expert, 2) frustration with their health state, 3) loss of freedom and subsequent feelings of failure, 4) barriers to accessing health care, and 5) “good” and “bad” ED care. Asthma was an ever-present consideration in participants lives during times of “good asthma control” and times of exacerbation.Conclusions: Participants’ focus on the roles of hope and fear, both in the ED and beyond, suggests that openly acknowledging and addressing these emotional aspects as a part of the ED interaction could result in a better care experience for some patients. Seeing the whole person as more than their symptoms and sharing decision-making may help clinicians to provide care that supports hopefulness.
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 | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".