Safeguarding the Children: The Cancer Journey of Young Mothers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES: To investigate how young mothers manage their maternal roles and responsibilities during their journey as patients with cancer . RESEARCH APPROACH: Semistructured face-to-face interviews and analysis . SETTING: Rural and urban communities in eastern Canada. PARTICIPANTS: 18 mothers aged 27-45 years when diagnosed and who were concluding or had concluded treatment for breast or non-ovarian reproductive cancer. METHODOLOGIC APPROACH: Glaserian Grounded Theory. FINDINGS: During the various phases of the cancer journey, mothers focus their efforts on protecting their children from psychological harm. Safeguarding the Children is the explanatory model generated from the interview data that consists of four strategies-customizing exposure, reducing disruption to family life, finding new ways to be close, and increasing vigilance-which mothers implement to protect their children . CONCLUSIONS: Young mothers with cancer manage their maternal roles and responsibilities by strategizing how they can mitigate threats to their children's psychological well-being . INTERPRETATION: Nurses are ideally suited to address holistic needs and concerns of women with cancer who are mothers. Safeguarding the Children, as an explanatory model for practice, may equip oncology nurses with requisite knowledge and understanding to better anticipate resource, counseling, support, and referral needs of young mothers during their cancer journey .
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".