PloS one · 2026
Glycemic meritocracy, sport and care: Between lay expertise and medical recognition.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Vauthier Jean-Charles, Kabuth Bernard
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To explore the physician-patient relationship among individuals with type 1 diabetes engaged in extreme endurance sports, highlighting dynamics of recognition, autonomy, and negotiation in care.
METHODS: Qualitative study based on thirteen semi-structured interviews with French-speaking runners living with type 1 diabetes. Analysis followed a constructivist grounded theory approach, with inductive coding and triangulation.
RESULTS: The findings reveal a complex relational dynamic structured by gaps in medical expertise, the emergence of experiential autonomy, evolving forms of collaboration, and persistent structural constraints. These dynamics reflect a tension between standardized biomedical knowledge and situated, experience-based practices. Recognition of patient expertise appears conditional, often depending on the ability to maintain acceptable glycemic outcomes.
CONCLUSION: This study identifies an implicit model, termed glycemic meritocracy, in which patient autonomy and legitimacy are shaped by conformity to biomedical norms. These findings highlight the need to move beyond performance-based evaluations of care and to more fully integrate experiential knowledge into clinical practice, particularly in complex or atypical contexts.
METHODS: Qualitative study based on thirteen semi-structured interviews with French-speaking runners living with type 1 diabetes. Analysis followed a constructivist grounded theory approach, with inductive coding and triangulation.
RESULTS: The findings reveal a complex relational dynamic structured by gaps in medical expertise, the emergence of experiential autonomy, evolving forms of collaboration, and persistent structural constraints. These dynamics reflect a tension between standardized biomedical knowledge and situated, experience-based practices. Recognition of patient expertise appears conditional, often depending on the ability to maintain acceptable glycemic outcomes.
CONCLUSION: This study identifies an implicit model, termed glycemic meritocracy, in which patient autonomy and legitimacy are shaped by conformity to biomedical norms. These findings highlight the need to move beyond performance-based evaluations of care and to more fully integrate experiential knowledge into clinical practice, particularly in complex or atypical contexts.