MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2147687716 · doi:10.1002/jclp.21939

Trait Mindfulness, Repression, Suppression, and Self‐Reported Mood and Stress Symptoms Among Women With Breast Cancer

2012· article· en· W2147687716 on OpenAlex
Rie Tamagawa, Janine Giese‐Davis, Michael Speca, Richard Doll, Joanne Stephen, Linda E. Carlson

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Psychology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer AgencyUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMindfulnessPsychologyMoodBreast cancerClinical psychologyTraitPsychological interventionBig Five personality traitsPersonalityPsychotherapistCancerPsychiatryMedicineInternal medicineSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: This study sought to identify relationships between trait mindfulness, repressive, and suppressive emotional styles, and the relative importance of these traits in their association with self-reported psychological health among women with breast cancer. METHOD: Of the 277 women with breast cancer accrued in the study, 227 (81.9%) completed a set of questionnaires assessing personality traits, stress symptoms, and mood. RESULTS: High levels of mindfulness were associated with fewer stress-related symptoms and less mood disturbance, while high levels of suppression were associated with poorer self-reported health. CONCLUSION: Individuals' dispositional ways to manage negative emotions were associated with the experience of symptoms and aversive moods. Helping patients cultivate mindful insights and reduce deliberate emotional inhibition may be a useful focus for psycho-oncological interventions.

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)0.001
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 score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.460

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.369 · 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