MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321179592 · doi:10.12968/gasn.2023.21.1.30

The lived experiences of discomfort in women with Crohn's disease: a hermeneutic phenomenological study

2023· article· en· W4321179592 on OpenAlexaff
Oana-Irina Nistor, Rosemary Wilson, Dean A. Tripp, Pilar Camargo‐Plazas

Bibliographic record

VenueGastrointestinal Nursing · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEndometriosis Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsCrohn's and Colitis CanadaQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSnowball samplingMedicineLived experienceInterpretative phenomenological analysisNonprobability samplingCrohn's diseaseDiseaseQuality of life (healthcare)Qualitative researchHermeneutic phenomenologyNormativePsychotherapistNursingPsychologyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Discomfort in women with Crohn's disease is highly prevalent, even during remission. However, these women's lived experiences of discomfort are largely unknown. Aims: To explore the lived experiences of discomfort in women with Crohn's disease. Methods: Six women with Crohn's disease were recruited using purposive and snowball sampling. Semi-structured, audio-recorded interviews were conducted using Zoom and transcribed verbatim for analysis. van Manen's work guided the data analysis. Findings: Four phenomenological themes were identified: discomfort as an embodied experience, discomfort as a conscious experience, discomfort and social life, and discomfort as a way forward. Conclusion: Healthcare professionals and researchers can facilitate the recognition, impact and mitigating strategies of discomfort by acknowledging it as an essential phenomenon for women with Crohn's disease. Further research is recommended to understand better the experience of discomfort and its implications for women's quality of life and their social and therapeutic relationships.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.138
Threshold uncertainty score0.265

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGastrointestinal NursingSame topicEndometriosis Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207