Fathers experienced stillbirth as a waste of life and needed to protect their partners and express grief in their own way
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Samuelsson M, Radestad I, Segesten K. A waste of life: fathers' experience of losing a child before birth. Birth2001 Jun; 28 : 124 –30 [OpenUrl][1][CrossRef][2][PubMed][3][Web of Science][4] QUESTION: How do fathers experience the intrauterine death of their child? Phenomenology. Sweden. 11 fathers (age range 31–46 y) whose partners had stillborn children at 32–42 weeks of pregnancy in 1997 and 1998. 6 fathers already had children. 4 fathers had become fathers again after the stillbirth, and 4 of the men′s partners were pregnant at the time of the study. Fathers were interviewed 5–27 months after the stillbirth in the venue of their choice (at home or the hospital). Interviews of 25 minutes to 2 hours in length were taped and transcribed. The transcripts were analysed to identify meaningful central units. (1) Experiencing that the baby was no longer alive : 8 fathers had a premonition that something was wrong before being told about the stillbirth, but they still had hope. Fathers described feelings of impending catastrophe (including shock, a lack of feeling, and denial). They also described great disappointment when their preparations and expectations for the baby were thwarted. Most fathers found … [1]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DBirth%2B%2528Berkeley%252C%2BCalif.%2529%26rft.stitle%253DBirth%26rft.aulast%253DSamuelsson%26rft.auinit1%253DM.%26rft.volume%253D28%26rft.issue%253D2%26rft.spage%253D124%26rft.epage%253D130%26rft.atitle%253DA%2Bwaste%2Bof%2Blife%253A%2Bfathers%2527%2Bexperience%2Bof%2Blosing%2Ba%2Bchild%2Bbefore%2Bbirth.%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.1046%252Fj.1523-536X.2001.00124.x%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F11380384%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=10.1046/j.1523-536X.2001.00124.x&link_type=DOI [3]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=11380384&link_type=MED&atom=%2Febnurs%2F5%2F2%2F61.atom [4]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=000168872000008&link_type=ISI
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.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it