Exploring Gender-Related Experiences of Cancer Survivors Through Creative Arts: A Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Negative health consequences of cancer and its treatments are multifaceted. Research suggests numerous psychosocial benefits may be gained by cancer survivors who engage in arts-based practices. To grasp the breadth of this literature, we undertook a scoping review exploring the intersection between arts-based practices, gender, and cancer. Three databases were searched according to the following criteria: (a) participants older than 18 years, (b) use of arts-based practices, (c) explore cancer survivorship, and (d) gender-based analysis component. A total of 1,109 studies were identified and 11 met inclusion criteria. Themes extracted illustrate four transformative moments related to gender identities postcancer diagnosis: (a) fostering reflection after a cancer diagnosis, (b) constructing new narratives of gender postcancer, (c) navigating gender norms in search of support for new identities, and (d) interrogation of perceived gender norms. Findings demonstrate potential contributions of arts-based practices in shaping cancer-related gender identities. Future research should investigate these experiences across a wider population.
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 | 0.005 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".