MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W16676567 · doi:10.1177/082585970301900203

My Love is Hurting: The Meaning Spouses Attribute to Their Loved Ones’ Pain during Palliative Care

2003· article· en· W16676567 on OpenAlexaff
Anita Mehta, Hélène Ezer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Palliative Care · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityJewish General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpouseFeelingLearned helplessnessPalliative careMeaning (existential)PsychologyQualitative researchCancer painPsychotherapistNursingMedicineCancerClinical psychologySocial psychologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this qualitative study was to develop our knowledge of the pain experiences of family members by addressing the meaning of cancer pain to the spouse of a patient receiving palliative care. In particular, this study explored factors associated with the meanings the spouses ascribe to the experience of pain during palliative care and whether the meanings the patients attributed to pain were similar to the meanings held by the spouse. Two different states emerged, the "in-pain state" and the "out of pain state". The spouses described feelings of helplessness, fear, and unfairness when witnessing their loved one in pain. Once the pain had been controlled, spouses described feelings of peace and relaxation, and felt this meant that the couple could return to their old routines because their spouse was still alive. It was discovered that the meanings placed on the cancer pain differed for the spouse and the patient, with the spouse focusing on future consequences. Implications and suggestions for nursing practice and future research are proposed.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.511
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.121
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.270 · 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.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations15
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Palliative CareSame topicPalliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesFrench-language works237,207