MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390637504 · doi:10.1016/j.ijnsa.2024.100175

Prioritizing chronic pain self-management amid coexisting chronic illnesses: An exploratory qualitative study

2024· article· en· W4390637504 on OpenAlex
Charlotte Moore-Bouchard, Marie-Ève Martel, Élise Develay, José Côté, Madéleine Durand, M. Gabrielle Pagé

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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Nursing Studies Advances · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Education
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChronic painQualitative researchThematic analysisContext (archaeology)MedicineSelf-managementExploratory researchCompetence (human resources)Chronic conditionPsychologyPhysical therapyDiseaseSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: In Canada, one out of five people lives with chronic pain, a condition frequently co-occurring with other chronic illnesses. As with most chronic illnesses, successful engagement in symptom management is key. In the context of multiple illnesses, self-management involves daily prioritization of symptoms and conditions and decision-making, which can be challenging. Self-management of chronic illnesses can require more complex competence and tasks to address the different implications of each condition. Objective: Our research objective was to explore types and processes of self-management symptom prioritization among adults living with chronic pain and other chronic illnesses. Design: This research was carried out as part of a larger study that adopted an explanatory sequential mixed-methods design. This study focused more specifically on the qualitative part of the study. Settings: Participants recruited for the qualitative component took part in a semi-structured individual interview online or in-person at the center hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal. Participants: In total, 25 participants were interviewed, including 18 women and 7 men. Methods: To participate in the qualitative part of the study, participants were selected from the larger study and were eligible if they were 18 years old or older and experiencing pain for more than 3 months and had at least one other chronic illness for which they were receiving treatment or engaged in symptom management. Semi-structured interviews were conducted in-person or virtually and were transcribed verbatim. Reflexive thematic analysis was used to explore patients' narratives, and an open and iterative approach was adopted to code interviews and generate themes. Findings: The first theme, focus on symptom prioritization, showed different prioritization processes, including prioritizing a dominant illness, prioritizing multiple illnesses to avoid undesirable consequences, and finally absence of or automatic processes of prioritization. In the second theme, we identified several characteristics of an illness, in this case chronic pain that made it a self-management priority: uncontrollable and disabling nature, omnipresence, unpredictability, unpleasantness, and invisibility to others. In the last theme, we highlighted that some psychosocial factors influenced levels of engagement in self-management and prioritization processes, including social support and the patient-physician relationship. Conclusions: Chronic pain was the medical condition most often prioritized by participants in their self-management tasks. Because of its characteristics, it was the medical condition that had the most negative impact on day-to-day functioning.

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)0.002
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.715
Threshold uncertainty score0.617

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.473
Teacher spread0.412 · 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