Needs and Experiences With Health Care Providers of Adult Rare Disease Patients and Caregivers of People With Rare Diseases: Protocol for a Qualitative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Rare diseases in Europe are defined as diseases with a prevalence of less than 5 per 10,000 people. Despite their individual rarity, the total number of rare diseases is considerable. Rare diseases are often chronic and complex, affecting physical, mental, and neurological health. People with rare diseases face challenges such as delayed diagnosis, limited medical support, and financial burden. Caregivers, usually family members, bear significant physical and emotional burdens. Understanding the experiences of patients with rare disease and their caregivers is critical to effective care, but this is still underresearched. Better support and understanding of the challenges faced by both patients and caregivers is clearly needed. Our study will explore the experiences and needs of people with rare diseases and caregivers of people with rare diseases in relation to accessing health services. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to explore the experiences of patients with rare disease and their caregivers with Slovenian health care providers and to create a theoretical model of needs and experiences. METHODS: This is a qualitative thematic analysis study, using the codebook approach. The study will conduct semi-open-ended interviews to understand the experiences and needs of people with rare diseases and caregivers of people with rare diseases in relation to accessing health services. The interview questions will be based on an extensive literature review. Data from the interviews will be analyzed using thematic analysis to identify patterns and build a thematic map. Data will be analyzed by at least 2 coders. To ensure reliability, respondent validation will be conducted and negative cases investigated. Any discrepancies will be resolved by consulting the entire research team until a consensus is reached. RESULTS: This study was not specifically funded. However, author TČ is supported by grant number P3-0339 from the Slovenian Agency for Research and Innovation. This study was approved by the Medical Ethics Committee of the Republic of Slovenia (0120-47/2022/3), and recruitment is expected to begin in May 2024, with data analysis results anticipated by the end of 2025. CONCLUSIONS: This study will fill an important research gap in Slovenia by exploring the needs and experiences of people living with rare diseases and their caregivers. The results will contribute to the broader field of rare diseases and add knowledge that can inform future research processes and intervention strategies. It also aims to identify neglected areas that have a significant impact on the lives of people with rare diseases. This study is important not only because it addresses the immediate needs of the Slovenian rare disease community, but also because it contributes to a discussion on patient-centered care, health policy design, and the inclusion of psychosocial components in health care. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/53362.
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 | 0.048 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.036 | 0.006 |
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".