MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2058106005 · doi:10.1188/06.onf.291-302

Meaning-Making and Psychological Adjustment to Cancer: Development of an Intervention and Pilot Results

2006· article· en· W2058106005 on OpenAlex
Virginia Lee, S. Robin Cohen, Linda Edgar, Andréa Maria Laizner, Anita J. Gagnon

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueOncology nursing forum · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCoping (psychology)PopulationIntervention (counseling)Meaning (existential)Randomized controlled trialClinical psychologyPsychotherapistNursingPsychologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES: To develop an intervention that uniquely addresses the existential impact of cancer through meaning-making coping strategies and to explore the intervention's impact on psychological adjustment. DESIGN: Descriptive, qualitative approach to develop the intervention; one-group pre- and post-test design to pilot test the intervention. SETTING: Patients' homes or ambulatory oncology clinics affiliated with a university health center in eastern Canada. SAMPLE: 18 participants who were newly diagnosed in the past three months (n = 14), had completed treatment (n = 1), or were facing recurrence (n = 3) of breast (n = 10) or colorectal (n = 8) cancer. METHODS: Data were collected during interviews using a prototype intervention for trauma patients, and content was analyzed on an ongoing basis to fit the needs of the cancer population. Pretest and post-test questionnaires were administered to determine the intervention's effect. MAIN RESEARCH VARIABLES: Meaning-making intervention (MMI), patients' background variables, disease- or treatment-related symptoms, and psychological adjustment. FINDINGS: The MMI for patients with cancer consisted of as many as four two-hour, individualized sessions and involved the acknowledgment of losses and life threat, the examination of critical past challenges, and plans to stay committed to life goals. At post-test, participants significantly improved in self-esteem and reported a greater sense of security in facing the uncertainty of cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that meaning-making coping can be facilitated and lead to positive psychological outcomes following a cancer diagnosis. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: The MMI offers a potentially effective and structured approach to address and monitor cancer-related existential issues. Findings are useful for designing future randomized, controlled trials.

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 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)0.000
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score0.344

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.349 · 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