MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2765684380 · doi:10.15402/esj.v3i1.237

Hope and Advanced Breast Cancer: Engaging with the Parish Nursing Community to Explore Hope in Women with Advanced Breast Cancer in Nigeria

2017· article· en· W2765684380 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Agatha Ogunkorode, Lorraine Holtslander

Bibliographic record

VenueEngaged Scholar Journal Community-Engaged Research Teaching and Learning · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion, Spirituality, and Psychology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreast cancerFaithDignityCompassionNursingBreast cancer awarenessContext (archaeology)MedicinePsychological interventionSociologyCancerPolitical scienceHistoryLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Women with advanced breast cancer living in Nigeria face many obstacles and are very reliant on the support of faith communities, including parish nurses, who have a strong presence in Nigeria. Research with people with advanced cancer has shown the importance of hope as a source of strength and an important spiritual concept in their lives. Parish nursing focuses on the promotion of health within the context of the values, beliefs, and practices of the faith community. What distinguishes parish nursing care is the intentional integration of the body, mind, and spirit to create wholeness, health, and a sense of well-being even when the patient’s illness is not curable. This specialty nursing practice holds that all persons are sacred and must be treated with respect and dignity. In line with these beliefs, the parish nurse serves her community with compassion, mercy, presence, and justice. Community-based research is needed to explore what hope means for women in Nigeria with advanced breast cancer, in order to build essential and innovative nursing knowledge and provide opportunities to identify meaningful interventions and ways the faith community can support these women, their families, and their communities.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.537
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.065
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.472
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.5370.065
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.4030.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.413
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.102
GPT teacher head0.436
Teacher spread0.334 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEngaged Scholar Journal Community-Engaged Research Teaching and LearningSame topicReligion, Spirituality, and PsychologyFrench-language works237,207