People living with serious illness: stories of spirituality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To examine stories of spirituality in people living with serious illness. BACKGROUND: Although knowledge about the experience of people with various chronic illnesses is growing, there is little known about peoples' beliefs and perspectives relating to spirituality where there is a diagnosis of a serious chronic and life-limiting illness. DESIGN OF THE STUDY: A social constructionist approach to narrative inquiry was used. METHODS: In-depth narrative interviews were conducted on one occasion with 32 participants. This included 10 people with cancer, 14 people with end stage renal disease (ESRD) and eight people with HIV/AIDS. They ranged in age from 37-83 and included 18 men and 14 women. RESULTS: The themes were reflecting on spiritual religious and personal beliefs, crafting beliefs for their own lives, finding meaning and transcending beyond words. Participants melded various belief systems to fit their own lives. They also looked to find meaning in their illness experience and described what gave life meaning. For some aspects of these belief systems, participants could not or would not express themselves verbally, and it seemed that aspects of their experience were beyond language. CONCLUSIONS: The stories revealed considerable depth relating to perspectives on life, illness and existential questions, but many participants were not comfortable with the term 'spirituality'. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Nurses must remain open to learning about belief systems of each individual in their care, regardless of that individual's declared religious affiliation or declaration of no religious affiliation, given that personal beliefs and practices do not always fit into specific categories.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".