Mantram Repetition With Homeless Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Women and families are the fastest growing segment of the homeless population. Negative attitudes of nurses toward homeless women are a major barrier to homeless women seeking health care. This cross-sectional, mixed-methods pilot study, conducted primarily by nurses, tested the Mantram Repetition Program for the first time with 29 homeless women. The Mantram Repetition Program is a spiritually based skills training that teaches mantram (sacred word) repetition as a cost-effective, personalized, portable, and focused strategy for reducing stress and improving well-being. For the cross-sectional, pretest-posttest design portion of the study, the hypothesis that at least half of the homeless women would repeat their mantram at least once a day was supported with 88% of the women repeating their mantram 1 week later. The qualitative portion of this study using phenomenology explored the women's thoughts on mantram week 2. Themes of mantram repetition, mantram benefits, and being cared for emerged. This groundbreaking, interventional, mixed-methods pilot study fills a gap in interventional homeless research.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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".