Understanding the Lived Experience of Health Through the Exploration of Well-being of Women with Multiple Sclerosis in Southwestern Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The prevalence of Multiple Sclerosis (MS) is increasing globally with 2.8 million cases worldwide as of 2021, with Canada experiencing the highest incidence for this disease (Multiple Sclerosis International Foundation [MSIF], 2021; Multiple Sclerosis Society of Canada [MSSC], 2021). MS is an autoimmune disease that damages the myelin sheath in the central nervous system (spinal cord and brain) which may result in problematic symptoms such as cognitive dysfunction and lead to physical disability (MSSC, 2021). There are over 90,000 Canadians with MS, impacting women on a ratio of 3:1 compared to men (MSSC, 2021; Statistics Canada, 2013). Current literature suggests that women may experience health, social determinants of health, and disability differently and therefore may benefit from researchers considering gender as a focus for investigation of phenomena (Tobiasz-Adamczyk et al., 2017; Nyberg et al, 2016). The World Health Organization [WHO] (2014) describes health as physical, mental and social well-being, and the WHO definition is the most common conceptualization of health in nursing scholarship (Simmons, 1989; Tariq-Alslman et al., 2015). There is a gap in the literature that currently examines gender from a women’s perspective as to how health is experienced (Phillips & Hamberg, 2016). Additionally, there is a lack of qualitative evidence about the lived experience of women with MS to help guide health care practice and future research (VanRuymbeke & Sneider, 2013). Therefore, the study sought to better understand the essence of women’s experience of health through the exploration of their well-being as they live with MS. van Manen’s (1990, 1997) hermeneutic phenomenology was used as a guiding methodological perspective in this study. Keywords: Interpretive phenomenology, Multiple Sclerosis, Women’s Health, Women with Disability, Nursing, Nursing 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 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 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".