Support and information needs of people with systemic sclerosis by time since diagnosis: A cross-sectional study
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
Background: How support and informational needs of people with systemic sclerosis (SSc) may differ by time since diagnosis is not known. Our objective was to determine if informational and support needs of recently diagnosed individuals with systemic sclerosis differ from people diagnosed for longer periods of time. Methods: The North American Scleroderma Support Group Members survey included 30 items on reasons for attending support groups. Respondents were classified by time since diagnosis of 0–3 years, 4–9 years or 10+ years. Survey item responses were dichotomized into Not Important or Somewhat Important versus Important or Very Important. We conducted Chi-square tests with Hochberg’s Sequential Method to identify item differences by time since diagnosis. Results: A total of 175 respondents completed the survey. Most support needs were rated as Important or Very Important by respondents, regardless of disease duration, particularly needs related to interpersonal and social support (10 items; median 81%) and learning about disease treatment and management strategies (11 items; median 82%). Discussing other aspects of living with systemic sclerosis (e.g. spirituality, discussing disease with family and friends) was rated lower (9 items; 44%). Respondents with 0–3 years since diagnosis were the highest on 29 of 30 items. Respondents with 0–3 years since diagnosis were significantly higher on items related to discussing medical care and 4 items on other aspects (spirituality, talking with family and friends, financial issues, sexual issues). Conclusion: People with systemic sclerosis have a wide range of information and support needs, regardless of their disease duration, but people with recent diagnoses have greater 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.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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