MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2049892520 · doi:10.5737/1181912x1813439

Reflecting on spirituality in the context of breast cancer diagnosis and treatment

2008· article· en· W2049892520 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Judy Gould, Sue Wilson, Pamela Grassau

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Oncology Nursing Journal · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion, Spirituality, and Psychology
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityWomen's College Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpiritualityBreast cancerFeelingThematic analysisContext (archaeology)Meaning (existential)PsychologyLongitudinal studyHealth professionalsQualitative researchClinical psychologySocial psychologyMedicineCancerPsychotherapistInternal medicineSociologyAlternative medicineHealth carePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this first part of a longitudinal study, women were asked to reflect on the meaning of spirituality in the first year following diagnosis of breast cancer. Twenty-two women were interviewed at approximately one year post-diagnosis. This paper reports on a thematic analysis of these interviews. Participants' responses reflected three higher-order themes: relationship with a higher power, a deepening sense of self, and spiritual connection with others. The findings provide an enhanced understanding of how spirituality frames and impacts (both positively and negatively) the experience of breast cancer immediately following diagnosis and treatment. Most participants in this study found strength and support in their experiences of spirituality. They also spoke at times of feeling disconnected from or abandoned by God. The paper concludes with a discussion of how cancer health professionals might respond to the spiritual needs expressed by women living with cancer.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.461
Threshold uncertainty score0.718

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.147
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.310 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations4
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Oncology Nursing JournalSame topicReligion, Spirituality, and PsychologyFrench-language works237,207