Grandparents’ Experiences of Childhood Cancer, Part 1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, the authors examined the experiences of grandparents who have had, or have, a grandchild with childhood cancer. Sixteen grandparents were interviewed using unstructured interviews, and the data were analyzed according to hermeneutic-phenomenological tradition, as guided by the philosophical hermeneutics of Hans-Georg Gadamer. Interpretive findings indicate that grandparents suffer and worry in many complex ways that include a doubled worry for their own children as well as their grandchildren. According to the grandparents in this study, this worry was, at times, silenced in efforts to protect the parents of the grandchild from the burden of concern for the grandparent. Other interpretations include the nature of having one's universe shaken, of having lives put on hold, and a sense of helplessness. The grandparents in this study offer advice to other grandparents as well as to the health care system regarding what kinds of things might have been more helpful to them as one level of the family system, who, like other subsystems of the family, are also profoundly affected by the event of childhood 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 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".