MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Identity development and adaptation in adolescents with genetic conditions: a qualitatively oriented mixed-methods study to develop strategies for optimizing clinical genetics services

2025· other· en· W7084058538 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2025
Typeother
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBacterial Identification and Susceptibility Testing
Canadian institutionsBC Children's HospitalWomen's Health Research InstituteUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdaptation (eye)Qualitative researchVariety (cybernetics)PerceptionIdentity (music)Scale (ratio)Context (archaeology)Structural equation modelingDescriptive statistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Genetic counselling for adolescents necessitates an approach distinct from that used with adults. Developing best practices is crucial, considering the growing number of disabled adolescents worldwide and increasing use of genomic testing early in life. We investigated perceptions of adolescents (10–19 years) who had been diagnosed with a genetic disorder in terms of how they describe receiving, understanding, and living with a genetic condition. We undertook a cross-sectional, qualitatively oriented mixed methods study underpinned by the pragmatic paradigm. Adolescents completed two self-report measures – the psychological adaptation scale (PAS) and the illness identity questionnaire (IIQ)—and participated in semi-structured interviews. Demographic, PAS, and IIQ data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. We used phronetic iterative analysis to interrogate interview data. Qualitative and quantitative components were integrated through abduction. Results Eighteen participants (median age: 15.5 years; 11/18 women/girls; 13/18 typical cognition; 8/18 de novo presentation) with a variety of genetic conditions participated. Participants had a mean PAS of 3.07 ± 0.84 indicating adequate adaptation. Their IIQ profiles indicated slightly better mean adaptive scores (3.10 ± 1.06) than mean maladaptive scores (2.85 ± 0.99). We developed a conceptual model that describes disability and genetic identity development and psychological adaptation among participants composed of three interacting components: internalizing processes; variability arising from contextual factors; and external factors associated with the processes. Adolescents generally moved among four internalizing processes (initiating, minimizing, exploring, and accepting). Movement across these processes took place frequently because of contextual factors like setting and disability type. Communication and engagement with caregivers, peers, and healthcare professionals, social interactions with others who have the same or a similar condition, and the impact of ableism constituted the main external factors with which adolescents engaged in the development of these identities. Conclusions Our findings present a foundation upon which to develop a care model optimized for the needs of adolescents with genetic conditions. Enhancing access to genetic counselling as a means of facilitating identity development is an important component of these care models.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.590
Threshold uncertainty score0.963

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.345 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicBacterial Identification and Susceptibility TestingFrench-language works237,207