Perspectives of Adolescents and Young Adults With Inflammatory Bowel Disease on a Biopsychosocial Transition Intervention: Qualitative Interview Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The transition from pediatric to adult health care marks a complex and pivotal process for adolescents and young adults with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). This group requires support regarding disease self-management, skill development, and system navigation in preparation for transition. Evidence-based interventions are needed to promote optimal health and psychosocial outcomes for adolescents and young adults with IBD during this period. Objective: A qualitative study embedded within a randomized controlled trial was conducted to evaluate the perceived impact of a biopsychosocial transition intervention on the transition experiences of adolescents and young adults, their views on the intervention, and recommendations for future care. Methods: This patient-oriented research study used a qualitative descriptive design. Virtual semistructured interviews were held with 21 adolescents and young adults with IBD (16-18 y) enrolled in the randomized controlled trial (intervention arm n=11 and control arm n=10). Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using an inductive approach to reflexive thematic analysis. Five members of a Youth Advisory Panel with lived experience of IBD collaborated throughout data analysis, interpretation, and the presentation of findings. Results: We constructed three themes through our analysis: (1) making meaning of transitions in care; (2) perceptions and impact of the biopsychosocial transition intervention; and (3) considerations for future transition care, including the importance of individualized support. Conclusions: Our findings illustrate the importance of relationships and the impact of a biopsychosocial intervention on adolescents' and young adults' confidence, knowledge, and self-management skills during transition. The results, which indicate the criticality of tailoring transition supports according to adolescents' and young adults' preferences and characteristics, will be used to refine the biopsychosocial intervention before it can be scaled and spread.
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 | 0.014 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".