MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313562766 · doi:10.33235/wcet.42.4.41-47

The meaning of diabetes for individuals who develop diabetic foot ulcer: a qualitative study informed by social constructivism and symbolic interactionism frameworks

2022· article· en· W4313562766 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Idevânia G. Costa, Pilar C Plazas

Bibliographic record

VenueWCET Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetic Foot Ulcer Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityLakehead University
FundersCanadian Frailty Network
KeywordsSymbolic interactionismSocial constructivismQualitative researchMeaning (existential)Constructivism (international relations)InteractionismSociologyEmbodied cognitionEpistemologyPsychologySocial psychologyPsychotherapistPedagogySocial sciencePolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective This qualitative inquiry explored the meaning associated with diabetes for people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes who developed diabetic foot ulcer (DFU).Methodology This qualitative study used a social constructivism and symbolic interactionism (SI) framework to guide the study design.The participants for this study were 30 adults with type 1 or type 2 diabetes and a DFU who met the research criteria and attended a wound care clinic in Ontario, Canada, between April and August 2017.Results Qualitative content analysis revealed three major subcategories that represent the core category (the meaning of diabetes) along with participants' perception of having diabetes and its particular complication -1) diabetes is a lifelong disease that you need to live with, 2) diabetes can damage your body, and 3) diabetes can kill you slowly. ConclusionsThe complexity of self-care and the consequences of unregulated diabetes influenced participants' perception, meaning, motivation, actions and reactions to diabetes.Understanding that each person with diabetes is unique and may experience or are affected by the disease in different ways helps healthcare providers (HCPs) to better understand how to address each individual's unique and complex needs.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.274
Threshold uncertainty score0.843

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.324 · 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 teacher head, 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 routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWCET JournalSame topicDiabetic Foot Ulcer Assessment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207