MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4392938918 · doi:10.1101/2024.03.14.24304312

“…but I know something’s not right here”: Exploring the diagnosis and disclosure experiences of persons living with ALS

2024· preprint· en· W4392938918 on OpenAlexaff
Kathleen M. Foldvari, Paul Stolee, Elena Neiterman, Véronique Boscart, Catherine Tong

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAmyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThematic analysisFocus groupPsychologyHealth careIntervention (counseling)Amyotrophic lateral sclerosisDiseaseMedicineQualitative researchPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS), an incurable motor neuron disease, primarily affects those between the ages of 60-79, and has an approximate post-diagnosis life--expectancy of only two to five years. The condition has an unpredictable but ultimately terminal trajectory that poses a number of challenges for patients, caregivers and healthcare providers. While the diagnosis and disclosure are critical periods for intervention and support, knowledge regarding the relational, communicational and psychodynamic forces that occur within the process of diagnostic disclosure is relatively limited. Objectives The purpose of this study was to explore the experiences of persons living with ALS in the diagnosis and disclosure of the condition, and the experiences of their caregivers. Methods We conducted a focus group and in-depth individual interviews with Canadians living with ALS (n = 9), family caregivers (n = 7), a professional caregiver (n = 1), and one past caregiver (1). The interviews were transcribed, cleaned, and anonymized, and then entered into NVivo 11 for thematic analysis. Results Participants discussed the diagnosis process, including the inklings and subtle changes prior to diagnosis, attempts at self-diagnosis, and the lengthy assessment process. Time was also a consideration in the disclosure process, in which participants shared how the diagnosis disclosure was the product of longstanding conversations with their care providers. It was described as rarely a shock to finally have confirmation. Additionally, participants shared their information seeking strategies and needs for a diagnosis that, for them, typically came with insufficient information on the disease, prognosis, and next steps. Significance This project serves as an initial step in bridging the relevant gaps in our knowledge and understanding towards improved patient-centered care practices in the diagnosis and disclosure of ALS.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.104
Threshold uncertainty score0.207

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0220.015
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxiv→Same topicAmyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Research→French-language works237,207→