MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385720956 · doi:10.1186/s40337-023-00859-z

Experiences of a virtual day program for adolescents with eating disorders: a qualitative analysis of benefits and barriers

2023· article· en· W4385720956 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Eating Disorders · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEating Disorders and Behaviors
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFeelingMedicineQualitative researchEating disordersHealth carePsychologyFamily medicineNursingClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, there was a detrimental impact to the symptoms and treatment of eating disorders, causing an increase in medical admissions and visits. Day treatment programs (DTPs), often used to bridge the gap between inpatient and outpatient treatment, were converted to online formats. This study aims to explore the impact of the transition to virtual DTPs on eating disorder treatment from the perspective of adolescents, their caregivers, and program staff. METHODS: Twelve participants (3 adolescents, 4 caregivers, 5 healthcare providers) in a virtual day treatment program were interviewed using a semi-structured interview guide. Interviews were transcribed and managed with qualitative software NVivo 11.0. Conventional analysis was used to inductively identify pertinent themes related to patient, caregiver, and healthcare staff perceptions and experiences of the virtual day treatment. Summative content analysis provided counts of the barriers and benefits of virtual day treatment as identified by participants. RESULTS: The majority of participants (10/12) had exposure to both virtual and in person settings, most participants (11/12) felt in-person day programs would be superior to virtual programs. Common limitations of the virtual format were feelings of isolation, less support from healthcare providers, parental burnout, and increased disordered eating. Common benefits were increased accessibility, parental involvement, improved communication with healthcare staff, and the ability for participants to be in their home environment and eat home food. Suggestions for improvement included designing a hybrid model of day treatment, increased family involvement, extending the day program to include dinners with family, and screening for patient appropriateness for the virtual setting. CONCLUSION: This qualitative study suggests that there are many barriers to effective implementation of virtual day programs. However, the virtual DTP program offers increased accessibility to patients during a period of a health pandemic and to patients in rural/remote areas with limited treatment options. Suggestions provided by participants in this study, such as increased family involvement, frequency of in person check-ins and increased number of meals supported by the program, may help to improve outcomes in virtual day treatment programs.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.509
Threshold uncertainty score0.781

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.349 · 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