“Crying in the Wilderness”—The Use of Web-Based Support in Telomere Biology Disorders: Thematic Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Web-based information and social support are commonly used in rare disease communities where geographic dispersion and limited provider expertise complicate in-person support. We examined web-based resource use among caregivers of individuals with telomere biology disorders (TBDs), which are rare genetic conditions with long diagnostic odysseys and uncertain prognoses including multiorgan system cancer risk. OBJECTIVE: This study explored internet-based information-seeking and social support practices and perspectives of patients with TBDs and their caregivers. METHODS: Our qualitative descriptive study used semistructured interviews of patients with TBDs and caregivers. Data were transcribed verbatim and thematically analyzed by an interdisciplinary team. RESULTS: A total of 32 adults completed interviews. Participant ages ranged from 27 to 74 years. The majority (n=28, 88%) were female, occupied multiple TBD roles (eg, patient and parent), and had undergone genetic testing. Most engaged in web-based information-seeking (n=29, 91%) and TBD-specific social media (n=26, 81%). Participants found web-based resources useful for information-seeking but reported privacy concerns and frustration with forming supportive relationships. Most participants described ambivalence toward web-based resource use, citing tensions between hunger for information versus distrust, empowerment versus overwhelm, disclosure versus privacy, and accessibility versus connection. Fluctuations in web-based support use arose from perceived harms, information saturation, or decreased relevance over the course of TBD illness experience. CONCLUSIONS: Individuals with TBDs and their caregivers reported frequent use of web-based informational and emotional support. However, ambivalence about the benefits and liabilities of web-based resources and persistent medical uncertainty may impact the adoption of and adherence to web-based support among patients with TBD and caregivers. Our findings suggest web-based psychosocial support should target long-term and multifaceted informational and emotional needs, be user-initiated, be offered alongside in-person formats, provide expert-informed information, and be attentive to personal privacy and evolving support needs of the TBD community. This study suggests web-based resources will be most effective in the TBD context when they achieve the following features: (1) offer a variety of ways to engage (eg, active and passive), (2) provide privacy protections in moderated "safe spaces" designed for personal disclosure, (3) offer separate venues for informational versus emotional support, (4) combine web-based relationship formation with opportunities for in-person gathering, (5) provide information that is reliable, easy to access, and informed by medical professionals, (6) remain mindful of user distress, and (7) are responsive to variations in levels and types of engagement. Additionally, advocacy organizations may wish to avoid traditional social media platforms when designing safe spaces for web-based emotional support, instead pivoting to internet-based tools that minimize privacy threats and limit the perpetual public availability of shared information.
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 | 0.020 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".