The spiritual meaning of pre-loss music therapy to bereaved caregivers of advanced cancer patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to learn how music therapy sessions, held prior to the death of a loved one, impact spirituality in surviving caregivers of advanced cancer patients. METHOD: The method of naturalistic inquiry was used to investigate the spiritual meaning of pre-loss music therapy sessions. Bereaved caregivers of seven different patients, who had been receiving music therapy through a home-based hospice program, participated in individual open-ended interviews. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and coded. Themes were organized as they emerged. RESULTS: As caregivers reflected on their experiences in music therapy, they reported autonomous joy (music therapy affected the caregiver directly) and empathic joy (caregivers' joy was based in remembering seeing the patient happy in music therapy). They also noted feelings of empowerment due to the ways they felt they had contributed in the care of the patients through music therapy. The caregivers were found to engage in processes of reflection that inspired these spiritual themes: reflection on the present (connectedness), reflection on the past (remembrance), and reflection on the future (hope). They referred to the ways that the music therapy sessions helped them find connection with self, others (through bringing their loved ones "back to life" and have a "renewal of self"), and the "beyond"; and that times in music therapy brought them happy memories and sentiments of hope. Meaning through transcendence was found to be the overarching trend in this study, as caregivers were lifted from remorse into heightened sense of meaning and gained "airplane views" of their lives. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: Pre-loss music therapy can potentially assist caregivers during times of bereavement, as they retain memories of joy and empowerment, rather than memories of pain and distress, and find meaning through transcendence.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".