MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7043820320

“Until you’re there… you don’t know how you’ll be”. a phenomenological study of the influence of lived experiences on beliefs and attitudes about being a patient.

2012· dissertation· en· W7043820320 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMspace (University of Manitoba) · 2012
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPatient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTheory of planned behaviorPaternalismSet (abstract data type)Perspective (graphical)Health careInterpretative phenomenological analysisOrder (exchange)Lived experience
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canadians are worried about the future of the health care system, and provincial governments are questioning the ability of the existing system to support Canadians health care needs in the 21st Century(Industry Canada, 2011). Health care providers and system administrators are both driving and experiencing a paradigm shift; moving away from paternalism and toward an egalitarian approach. In order to practice patient centredness, health care providers must prioritize patient needs; provide information regarding treatments while taking patient preferences into account (Romanow, 2002). While there is a growing body of literature regarding patient centredness, there is scant information from the patient perspective. If the most effective and acceptable health services are those that realize the expectations of the users, this is an important area of study. Using phenomenological research methods and the theory of planned behaviour as a theoretical framework, the purpose of the study was to explore the influence of beliefs, attitudes and experiences on behaviour from the perspective of patients in primary health care or stroke rehabilitation. A second purpose was to explore the degree to which beliefs, attitudes and behaviour were similar between clinical contexts. The theory of planned behaviour was unsuitable for understanding peoples’ beliefs, attitudes and behaviour about being a patient. Being a patient was not a single, observable behaviour, but rather a set of contextually dependent strategies patients’ directed at a particular goal. The goal for each participant group was different; rehabilitation patients focused on the specific goal of recovery and discharge, while PHC patients focused on a broader goal of accessing and receiving best health care possible. These goals were reflected in their respective approaches to accessing health care services, an experience they described as socially oriented, governed and reinforced. Although patients described themselves as actively engaged, they did not approach each interaction with health care with a set of behavioural beliefs about being a patient. During the course of their participation, patients identified, developed and adopted strategies to assist in achieving the target; and evaluated those strategies more positively.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0150.027
Scholarly communication0.0060.009
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0020.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMspace (University of Manitoba)→Same topicPatient-Provider Communication in Healthcare→French-language works237,207→