MANAGEMENT OF OSTEOPOROTIC VERTEBRAL FRACTURES: THE PATIENT’S PERSPECTIVE REGARDING THE NEED FOR INFORMATION, PROGRAMS AND SERVICES.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Approximately 1.4 million Canadians live with osteoporosis with over 530,000 in Ontario. Research suggests a relationship between osteoporotic vertebral fractures and a decreased ability to perform activities of daily living, an increase in overall level of disability, and ability to engage in leisure activities. How information and current programs and services relate to the needs of patients with osteoporosis requires further exploration. This study uses a phenomenological approach to explore the specific needs of individuals with osteoporotic vertebral fractures living independently in the community. Three focus groups were conducted with a total of nine participants recruited through the Regional Osteoporosis Clinic. An environmental scan of currently available programs and services in London, Ontario was conducted. Inductive content analysis was used to understand the women's needs for information, programs and services. Findings suggest a discrepancy between participants expressed needs and currently available information, programs, and services. Results indicate that women perceive osteoporotic vertebral fractures through three lenses: journey to diagnosis, learning about the condition, and adapting to the condition. Three major gaps were identified including lack of linking a person to osteoporosis information, lack of programs and services for those with osteoporotic vertebral fractures, and health care system barriers. Findings from this study may inform future health promotion and service delivery strategies offered by the Osteoporosis Canada and the Ontario Osteoporosis Strategy.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| 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".