Lived experiences of self-care among adults with inflammatory bowel disease in Northeastern Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adults with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) experience debilitating symptoms that \nimpede their ability to engage in daily activities. In Northeastern Ontario, there is limited \naccess to formal specialized resources inhibiting the development of self-care strategies for \nliving cohesively with IBD. An interpretive phenomenological analysis was used to gain an \nunderstanding of the lived experience of self-care among adults with IBD in Northeastern \nOntario. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with six individuals diagnosed with \nIBD. Analysis resulted in the identification of two main themes: living with uncertainty and \nseeking control. The four subthemes included: disease uncertainty, formal care uncertainty, \nself-directed resourcefulness, and self-developed observational skills. The lived experience of \nself-care found to be the actions undertaken to live with uncertainty and seek control in the \ncontext of inflammatory bowel disease. The findings align with the Theory of Self-care of \nChronic Illness, and provide new insights into potential improvements in patient-centered \ncare, the importance of informal resource utilization, and describe how adults living with \nIBD in Northern communities navigate their illness through self-care.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".