MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2537093556 · doi:10.5737/23688076264318324

« Tout ce que je peux faire, c’est l’aider » : Expérience de transition des conjoints de patientes atteintes du cancer du sein

2016· article· fr· W2537093556 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Kelly Struthers Montford, Wendy Duggleby, Ceinwen E. Cumming, Roanne Thomas, Cheryl Nekolaichuk, Sunita Ghosh, Katia Tonkin

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Oncology Nursing Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFamily Support in Illness
Canadian institutionsQuebec Rehabilitation Research NetworkCanadian Nurses FoundationUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On en sait très peu sur l’expérience de transition que vivent les hommes dont la conjointe est atteinte d’un cancer du sein. Quatre-vingt-onze sondages à questions ouvertes réalisés auprès de ce type de population ont été soumis à une analyse thématique, en vue de comprendre l’expérience de transition des hommes dont la conjointe a reçu un diagnostic de cancer du sein et suivi un traitement. Si dix participants ont indiqué n’avoir expérimenté aucun changement, la plupart ont vu leur rôle et leur relation se transformer, de même que leur santé mentale et leur part des tâches ménagères. Les conjoints se sont retrouvés dans le rôle d’aidant. Ils ont composé avec les changements en se montrant proactifs et conscients de leur situation, en entretenant une attitude positive et en prenant activement part au vécu de leur conjointe. Il en découle que le personnel infirmier doit, pour sa part, reconnaître le rôle du conjoint et lui faciliter l’accès à des renseignements fiables et à des réseaux de soutien. Mots clés : proche aidant; cancer du sein; transition; soins

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.010
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.278 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Oncology Nursing JournalSame topicFamily Support in IllnessFrench-language works237,207