MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413501359 · doi:10.1177/09593535251361545

Navigating the “rabbit hole”: An embodied and affective account of patienthood and chronic illness

2025· article· en· W4413501359 on OpenAlexaff
Jennifer C. H. Sebring

Bibliographic record

VenueFeminism & Psychology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMental Health and Patient Involvement
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmbodied cognitionPsychologyPsychotherapistEpistemologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Feminist scholars studying chronic illness have drawn on the notion of personhood to develop the concept of patienthood, highlighting the socially and culturally constructed nature of this subjectivity. To further conceptualizations of patienthood, I conducted arts-based qualitative research, asking: how do young women and gender-diverse adults living with chronic illnesses understand and experience patienthood? Multimedia collage workshops with 10 women and nonbinary people living with chronic illnesses invited participants to create “portraits of patienthood.” My analysis of the artwork continues the interdisciplinary work of conceptualizing patienthood by reading the art through critical disability scholar Margaret Price's notion of “crip spacetime.” Together, Price's theory and participant accounts illuminate the deeply relational, embodied, and affective dimensions of patienthood as shaped by the entanglement of social, material, cultural, and psychological factors. This study identifies the metaphor of the “rabbit hole” as an apt description of the complexities inherent in navigating the fluctuating nature of chronic illness amid a lack of systemic support.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.428
Threshold uncertainty score0.629

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.086
GPT teacher head0.476
Teacher spread0.390 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFeminism & PsychologySame topicMental Health and Patient InvolvementFrench-language works237,207