Transition from Paediatric to adult health services: Aspirations and practices of human flourishing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Transition from paediatric to adult care is challenging for youths with a chronic condition. Most transition programmes place high value in autonomy and independence. We undertook a qualitative study to: (1) identify the needs and aspirations of youths and (2) better understand the well-being and flourishing of youths. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with youths, parents of youths and healthcare professionals recruited from four clinics. Thematic analysis focused on: (1) perceptions of transition; (2) key aspects of human flourishing during transition; and (3) salient concerns with respect to the transition and dimensions of human flourishing. RESULTS: 54 interviews were conducted. Perceptions of transition clustered around: (1) apprehension about adult care; (2) lack of clarity about the transition process; (3) emotional attachment to paediatric healthcare professionals; (4) the significance of the coinciding transition into adulthood. Fourteen salient concerns (e.g., Knowledge and information about the transition, Parental involvement in healthcare) were identified with corresponding recommendations. Salient concerns related to important dimensions of human flourishing (e.g., environmental mastery, autonomy). DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: The flourishing of youths is affected by suboptimal transition practices. We discuss the implications of our findings for environmental mastery, contextual autonomy, and the holistic and humanistic aspects of 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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".