“Changeons les Règles!” development and feasibility testing of an encounter decision aid for menstrual management in adolescents and young adults with developmental disabilities
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To report the developing process and acceptability testing of a decision aid designed for adolescents and young adults with developmental disabilities, focusing on treatment options for menstrual management. We developed a paper-based encounter decision aid to support shared decision-making about treatment options for menstrual management for adolescents and young adults with developmental disabilities. This tool was designed to be both evidence-based and user-centered. We conducted a feasibility study to assess its acceptability The decision aid was used during consultations with 18 adolescents and young adults with developmental disabilities and their caregivers. Participants reported high levels of acceptability and found the tool helpful in facilitating decision-making. They particularly valued the ability to compare treatment options side by side. The tool also promoted meaningful conversations between patients and clinicians The decision aid was well-accepted and successfully facilitated the discussion about menstrual management options between patients and clinicians. Further research is needed to evaluate its long-term impact on decision making outcomes and patient satisfaction This innovative tool may support shared decision-making for adolescents and young adults with developmental disabilities and their caregivers, and provide additional insight on how to engage individuals with developmental disabilities in healthcare decisions. • A decision aid was created to support shared decision-making about menstrual management. • A feasibility study showed high levels of acceptability among adolescents with disability. • The innovative tool facilitated comparison of treatment options. • The use of the decision aid was associated with a reduction in decisional conflict. • It provides new insight on how to engage people with disability in decision making.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it