Children with cancer and their families believed and expected that symptom suffering was necessary to overcome cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Woodgate RL, Degner LF. Expectations and beliefs about children’s cancer symptoms: perspectives of children with cancer and their families. Oncol Nurs Forum 2003;30:479–91.[OpenUrl][1][CrossRef][2][PubMed][3] Q How do children with cancer and their families experience cancer symptoms? Grounded theory and illness narratives. Participants’ homes and inpatient and outpatient paediatric cancer units in western Canada. 39 children with cancer at varying stages (age 4.5–18 y, 54% girls, 95% Caucasian) and their families. All children received chemotherapy alone or in combination with surgery, radiation, or bone marrow transplant. Data were collected from 230 individual or joint interviews with mothers (117 interviews), fathers (46 interviews), siblings (48 interviews), and children (103 interviews); and 960 hours of participant observation of children and their family members. Audiotapes and field notes were transcribed, and data were analysed using constant comparison and illness narratives. Children and their families described 5 common beliefs and expectations. (1) Short term pain for long term gain emphasised how children and their families equated cancer with suffering, and the belief that suffering was … [1]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DOncology%2Bnursing%2Bforum%26rft.stitle%253DOncol%2BNurs%2BForum%26rft.aulast%253DWoodgate%26rft.auinit1%253DR.%2BL.%26rft.volume%253D30%26rft.issue%253D3%26rft.spage%253D479%26rft.epage%253D491%26rft.atitle%253DExpectations%2Band%2Bbeliefs%2Babout%2Bchildren%2527s%2Bcancer%2Bsymptoms%253A%2Bperspectives%2Bof%2Bchildren%2Bwith%2Bcancer%2Band%2Btheir%2Bfamilies.%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.1188%252F03.ONF.479-491%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F12719747%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [2]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1188/03.ONF.479-491&link_type=DOI [3]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=12719747&link_type=MED&atom=%2Febnurs%2F7%2F1%2F29.atom
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".