MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W20284745 · doi:10.1177/082585970602200203

Living in a World without Closure: Reality for Parents who have Experienced the Death of a Child

2006· article· en· W20284745 on OpenAlexaff
Roberta L. Woodgate

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Palliative Care · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClosure (psychology)PsychologyMedicineNursingPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The death of a child has been described as being for parents one of the most traumatic of losses. Nevertheless, information about how parents experience transition through the death trajectory is lacking. This phenomenological study explored parents' lived experienced of transitioning through the death of a child. Twenty-eight bereaved parents (17 mothers, 11 fathers) took part in retrospective, open-ended interviews. Findings showed that, regardless of the time, parents continued to live in a world without closure and, more importantly, did not want to experience closure in their transitioning. To parents, "closure" meant an end to their child in every sense of the word. Their experience of living in a world without closure was supported by four themes: "keeping the memories alive", "being a good parent", "being there at my child's death", and "being there for me after my child dies". Findings yield new insights into how parents live with the death of a child.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.008
Scholarly communication0.0040.006
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.344 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations85
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Palliative CareSame topicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207