Spiritual issues associated with traumatic-onset disability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The present study used a qualitative approach to discover the concepts used by people with a sudden-onset disability to express issues of spirituality. Using a cross-sectional time frame, the study sought to understand how spiritual issues were experienced at the onset of a disability from the perspective of the disabled person him or herself. The study also compared the perceptions of brain injury respondents to spinal cord injury respondents. METHOD: The qualitative approach was chosen to capture a detailed understanding of perceptions about spirituality, and the relationship of the disability to the disabled person's spiritual beliefs. The sample consisted of 16 individuals, all of whom had experienced a spinal cord injury or a brain injury. RESULTS: The main findings of the study were as follows: (1) Participants recovering from a disability described spiritual issues relating to five themes which arose directly from the data (awareness, closeness, trust, purpose, vulnerability) and relating to three relationships found throughout the literature on spirituality (intrapersonal, interpersonal and transpersonal). These eight dimensions can be combined to form a matrix, which serves as a framework for considering spiritual issues associated with disability; and (2) There were differences in the spiritual concepts described by the participants with brain injury compared to those with spinal cord injury. In particular, those with brain injuries seemed to place greater emphasis on the importance of their families, and to be more aware of the need for trust in view of their memory deficits. CONCLUSIONS: These results represent one of the earliest attempts to take an empirical approach to the development of theory in the area of spirituality and disability. Building on theory developed in other populations (palliative care and ageing), the study offers a theoretical model for clinicians, educators and researchers to better understand spirituality in the context of disability.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".