Youth feedback through emotional mapping in the Transition to Adulthood through Coaching and Empowerment study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Youth with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) face challenges transitioning to adult care due to physiological and psychosocial impacts of their disease. Current transition care models vary, and few have been comprehensively evaluated. Previously, we conducted a feasibility randomized-controlled trial (TRACE - Transition to Adulthood through Coaching and Empowerment) testing a Transition Coach Intervention (TCI) supporting youth with JIA and IBD transitioning to adult care. Involving youth as research partners is critical in developing and evaluating transition interventions. Objective: To evaluate youth satisfaction and feedback on the TCI to inform future study methodology. Methods: We conducted an emotional mapping exercise to identify emotions youth felt regarding the feasibility study and TCI. In virtual focus groups, participants answered questions about study recruitment, logistics, and transition coaching sessions. To support explaining and recalling their experiences, participants selected responses including: comfortable, supported, safe, worried, confused, frustrated and other. Identifying their emotions supports participants in explaining their experiences. Results: Eight individuals (n = 4 female, ages 18-19 years, n = 5 IBD) participated in two focus groups (n = 4 each). Participants felt comfortable with the study's recruitment process. All TCI group participants reported positive feelings, though one felt overwhelmed by the amount of information in one session, and two found the psychologist sessions redundant. Conclusions: Feedback from the emotional mapping exercise indicates the acceptability of the TRACE study among youth with JIA and IBD. This feedback is critical for planning a larger trial to evaluate the effectiveness of transition coaching in youth with chronic diseases.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".