MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2910749826 · doi:10.4103/jehp.jehp_82_16

Spiritual experiences of family members to cope with the challenges of childhood disability: A Qualitative study in Iran

2018· article· en· W2910749826 on OpenAlexaff
Mahsa Shakour, Khosrow Tavakol, Mahboubeh Karimi, Kobra Salehi, Fahimeh Kashani

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Education and Health Promotion · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFamily and Disability Support Research
Canadian institutionsOttawa Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQualitative researchPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyDistressData collectionSocial psychologyClinical psychologySociologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: If we take the family as a circle, the disabled child is in the center of the circle and weights on all communications in the family. Therefore, in this research, the experiences of all family members are studied. The knowledge about families' experiences helps the caregivers to have a deep recognition of family status and individual and social relations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a phenomenological study. Participants were Iranian families with disabled child and were selected by a goal-oriented sampling. Data collection was done through an unstructured interview. Interviews were transcript based. Data analysis was done by Colaizzi's method. Codes were extracted from the interviews and then the main concepts were formed by organizing the formulated meanings into clusters of themes. RESULTS: Data were being compiled from the 18-h interview tapes and the verbatim transcription of the interviews with the 12 study participants. Then, the researchers formulated the meanings of each significant statement into 65 codes and organized the formulated meanings into following four clusters of themes: 1 - protective structure, 2 - adjustment, 3 - social isolation, 4 - psychological tension. CONCLUSION: The existence of a disabled child may lead to psychological and spiritual distress and vast changes in every aspect of each member of the family.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.397
Threshold uncertainty score0.171

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.223
GPT teacher head0.529
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Education and Health PromotionSame topicFamily and Disability Support ResearchFrench-language works237,207