Storied Life: A Narrative Approach to Living with Chronic Illness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chronic illness is fraught with uncertainties (Johnson & Webster, 2002). While cures may elude chronic illnesses, postmodern psychotherapies can recraft life. This practice forum explores chronic illness and narrative therapy, a nonblaming approach to counseling premised on respect. We present a counseling conversation informed by narrative constructs and practices to explore how how life with psoriatic arthritis, a chronic condition that causes inflammation and pain in the skin and joints, can be recrafted. While psoriatic arthritis can be treated and monitored, it is a poorly understood condition with no known cures (Arthritis Society, n.d.). Prior to presenting the case, we situate chronic illness within the larger context of biomedicine and neoliberalism. In Western societies, biomedicine shapes our understandings of health and illness. Biomedical discourse is structured by the scientific method, explaining health and illness in terms of physiology and anatomy (Brown, 2017). Biomedicine views illness in terms of disease and symptoms that are treated by biomedical interventions, including medications, radiation, or surgery (Srikanthan, 2021). Chronic illness, which, by definition, cannot be eradicated by such interventions, eludes biomedicine in many respects (Johnson & Webster, 2002).
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 | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.033 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.016 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.017 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".