Bibliographic record
Abstract
It has often been noted that people with a severe illness endeavor to deepen their religious and spiritual practice and knowledge. It is generally accepted that spiritual and religious factors help sick people confront their suffering. The authors conducted a qualitative research on the role of religious and spiritual practices and knowledge among 10 cancer patients in Québec, Canada. Individual interviews focused on their illness experience confirmed that religion and spirituality can be present and contribute to coping when life is threatened. More precisely, the analyses of the place and use of these resources during the patient's illness showed that these resources contributed to an individual empowerment process that was undertaken in response to a biographic and existential disruption induced by the illness diagnosis. The sick people took advantage of religious and spiritual content in their quest for meaning and a cure, progressing from a stage of despair and powerlessness to a stage of hope, a critical analysis of the disease, and a better management and control of it and its evolution. This article describes how people suffering from cancer use and participate in religious and spiritual content. It demonstrates the contribution of this content to an individual empowerment process. The use of religion and spirituality constitutes a quest for self-mastery, an acquiring of power and control. We understand that religious and spiritual phenomena do not always prevent people from fighting against their suffering, limit their freedom, or systematically reduce people's viewpoints and worldviews.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".