Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Little is known about the influence of cancer on the adolescent's developing self-identity and social relationships as he/she transitions back to school following cancer treatment. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to explore the meaning of returning to school for adolescents who have completed cancer treatment. METHODS: In this qualitative study, in-depth interviews using an interpretive descriptive approach were conducted with 11 adolescents (aged 13-17 years) who had completed treatment for cancer. The transcripts of the audiotaped interviews were analyzed thematically and reviewed by the study team. RESULTS: Three main themes suggested that the return to school hallmarked the end of an illness episode and a welcome return to a sense of well-being: (a) being on the right track, (b) bridging two worlds, and (c) establishing a new life at school. Nearly all adolescents described being negatively impacted by the cancer experience. However, the ability to maintain friendships during the transition emerged as particularly salient to allow the adolescents to rise above the challenges and residual effects of cancer treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Returning to school following cancer treatment affects adolescents' beliefs about themselves, their self-identity, and their social relationships. Understanding the meaning that adolescents ascribed to returning to school facilitated the development of practice recommendations to improve adjustment to school. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Our study findings illuminate an important gap in the existing resources for adolescents in the posttreatment phase of cancer. Recommendations to promote healthy psychosocial development are proposed to better support adolescents during the reintegration to school.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".