"It feels like we are aliens": A narrative inquiry of life stories told by women with ADHD.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is a dearth of research on women with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and women’s voices and experiences of ADHD need to be better heard and understood. This qualitative inquiry aimed to better understand the lived and holistic experiences of women with ADHD in Alberta Canada, and how their experiences impacted identity and sense of self. A holistic perspective was chosen as it considers not only the mind, but the body and spirituality of the individual which are important to understanding self and experience. This study interviewed six adult women from Alberta, Canada using a narrative inquiry methodology. Themes presented from the narratives included 1) ‘feeling like an alien’ and experiences of alienation from self and social worlds; 2) differences in male and female experiences; 3) narratives of self-discovery, acceptance, and redefining success; 4) narratives on the importance of relationships; 5) narratives on identity and ADHD; 6) narratives on a holistic sense of self. This study presented an important perspective and insight into the worlds of women living with ADHD, and additionally exposed several gaps in the literature that would be important for further social work research and informing practice.
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 | 0.006 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 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".