The Three I's of Diabetes Integration in Emerging Adulthood: Developing a Framework to Individualize Diabetes Care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Transition to adult diabetes care occurs during a challenging stage of life known as emerging adulthood. As emerging adults are tasked with increased responsibility for diabetes management, they are faced with competing demands in work and education. This study employed a narrative approach to elucidate the lived experiences of emerging adults with Type 1 diabetes. In-depth interviews were performed with 33 participants (18 to 24 years of age). Narrative analysis defined story typology and themes across first-hand accounts. Participants narrated life with diabetes through one of three ‘lenses’: ingrained (n=14), intrusive (n=12) and inconspicuous (n=7). Participants conveying an ingrained lens described actively integrating diabetes within their lives. Through an intrusive lens, participants described struggles trying to accept diabetes and striving for control. Participants conveying an inconspicuous lens expressed a desire to minimize attention towards diabetes to protect their normalcy. This conceptual framework presents opportunities to individualize support accordingly.
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 | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| 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".