Three Papers on Patient Experiences with Symptom Persistent Lyme Disease in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dissertation consists of three empirical papers on patient experiences with symptom persistent Lyme disease in Canada. Lyme disease infection rates are rising across the country, a phenomenon attributed to climate change and the northern migration of ticks. The focus of this dissertation can advance knowledge in this area by addressing a gap in the current academic literature (a lack of patient voices). It is important that researchers continue to seek representation of patients’ embodied experiences in health research to advance equity and inclusion in healthcare. Study 1, an autoethnographic study, explores one researcher’s embodied experiences with co-occurring identities as a researcher, health professional, and patient living with chronic illness (symptom persistent Lyme disease). Study 2, a case study, explores the experiences of one young person, who is a patient with symptom persistent Lyme disease in Canada through collaborative research. Study 3, a qualitative study utilizing descriptive exploratory methodology, explores mothers’ experiences with symptom persistent Lyme disease in Canada. The findings from all three papers suggest that the government and public health agencies across the country should, on an ongoing basis, endeavor to advance public education on the risks of tick-borne illnesses. Further, the findings from each paper suggest that health professionals would benefit from continued education and training on tick-borne illness, and that ongoing collaboration between health professionals can be beneficial in the care and treatment of patients’ persistent Lyme disease symptoms. Finally, this dissertation highlights the benefits of collaborative healthcare (between alternative and Allopathic medicine) and may inform policy and decision-making focused on the prevention and treatment of Lyme disease in Canada.
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 | 0.009 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.041 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".