A qualitative follow-up on perceptions of energy management education and daily life by individuals with fatigue undergoing hemodialysis treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: People on chronic hemodialysis identify fatigue and its negative impact on their life participation (i.e., ability to accomplish valued daily occupations) as central to their illness experience. We explored how fatigue, as experienced by people on hemodialysis, shaped their participation in daily occupations, and participants' experiences in the Personal Energy Planning programme. Method: This qualitative follow-up study to a pilot randomized controlled trial used an interpretive description approach with six participants who completed an energy management programme for people treated with hemodialysis in Calgary, Canada. Each participant completed one semistructured interview about their experiences with fatigue management, life participation and the programme. Data were analyzed using modified constant comparative analysis. Findings: Participants described moving from an illness experience to one of living, where they could envision participation in both activities of daily living and social leisure occupations. Participants also described how they felt supported by the programme with its focus on applying the learning from the programme to improve their participation. Conclusion: Fatigue has an extensive impact on various facets of life participation. For people treated with hemodialysis, the reconstruction of their occupational lives can be enabled through energy management education programmes focused on the development of personal metacognitive strategies.
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 | 0.011 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".