MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116384274 · doi:10.5737/1181912x1712630

“The worst experience”: The experience of grandparents who have a grandchild with cancer

2007· article· en· W2116384274 on OpenAlex

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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Oncology Nursing Journal · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFamily Support in Illness
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCanadian Nurses FoundationCanadian Nurses Association
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrandparentGrandchildPsychologyMeaning (existential)Thematic analysisDevelopmental psychologyQualitative researchSocial psychologyGerontologyMedicineSociologyPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study explored the experience of eight grandparents having a grandchild diagnosed with cancer. Semi-structured interviews, both with individuals and couples, were used to gain a better understanding of the meaning these grandparents give to this experience. A thematic analysis based on Giorgi's (1997) phenomenological method highlighted three central themes: "Living the worst experience", "Having to support: A crucial role for grandparents", "To feel supported to better carry on." The results of this study can contribute to enhancing the quality of care for grandparents affected by their grandchild's 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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.730
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.330 · 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