Riding the wave: A grounded theory of transplant transition in adolescents and youth adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: The health care transition from pediatric to adult-focused health care for adolescent and young adult (AYA) organ transplant recipients is a critical yet understudied period. Unique challenges include supporting adherence to immunosuppressive regimens and addressing psychosocial factors that impact long-term graft survival and recipient well-being. The objective of this study was to understand how AYAs prepared for and engaged in the transition process. Methods: Constructivist grounded theory, underpinned by symbolic interactionism, was employed to systematically gather, synthesize, analyze, and conceptualize qualitative data from in-depth interviews with 14 transplant recipients, their families, and pediatric nurses, and related online social media stories. Results: which they did through navigating four phases: (1) anticipating the impending transition, (2) losing security when transitioning to uncertainty, (3) seeking supportive anchors in the swell of transition, and (4) gaining a new sense of self. Conclusions: AYA transplant recipients undergo numerous changes as they enter adulthood and adult-focused health care. There are many opportunities for pediatric and adult health care providers to collaborate to strengthen support for AYA recipients and their families during this critical period. Developmental and trauma-informed approaches are recommended to support successful transition.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".