The meaning of perinatal loss for women in Newfoundland : a phenomenological study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pregnancy is generally a time of joyous anticipation and positive outcomes for expectant couples. However, the expected birth of a healthy baby can come to a tragic end with a sudden, unanticipated pregnancy loss. This event can be devastating for women, their partners, and their families. Although there is a large body of literature on parental responses to perinatal loss and some of the factors influencing grief intensity, very few studies have examined a woman's lived experience with perinatal loss. This phenomenological study used van Manen's method to explore the question: What is the meaning of perinatal loss for women who have experienced a miscarriage or stillbirth? From the data collected in unstructured interviews, seven themes were identified: shattering of hopes and dreams; centrality of the loss; shared grieving: identifying and accepting differing coping styles; dealing with others; dealing with the loss; living with emotional uncertainty: gentle reminders; and letting go and moving on. The essence of this experience was searching for meaningful integration. The findings indicate that women who have early and late perinatal losses cope with feelings of loss and grief in an individualized manner. In searching for meaning in her experience, each woman was influenced by the responses of partners, family, others in the social world, and health care providers.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".