Exploring Hope and Healing in Patients Living With Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES: To explore the experience and meaning of hope in relation to the healing process of patients living with stage IIIb or IV non-small cell lung cancer. RESEARCH APPROACH: Interpretative qualitative study design. SETTING: Peter Brojde Lung Cancer Centre in the Jewish General Hospital in Montreal, Quebec, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: 12 English- and French-speaking patients, aged 36-78 years. METHODOLOGIC APPROACH: One 60-90-minute semistructured interview per participant was conducted. An inductive approach to data analysis was taken, involving immersion in the data, coding, classifying, and creating linkages. FINDINGS: Four main themes emerged: (a) the morass of shattered hope, (b) tentative steps toward a new hope paradigm, (c) reframing hope within the context of a life-threatening illness, and (d) strengthening the link between hope and wellness. CONCLUSIONS: Patients described a process where hope was diminished or lost entirely, regained, and reshaped as they learned to live and grow following their diagnosis. INTERPRETATION: This study adds to the literature by describing the dynamic nature of hope as well as factors facilitating or hindering the hope process. It demonstrates how finding meaning, a structural component of healing, can be used to envision a new hopeful future. This study suggests hope and healing cannot exist in isolation, and highlights the importance of understanding the fluctuating nature of hope in patients with advanced lung cancer to foster it, therefore promoting healing.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".