Spiritual experiences of family members to cope with the challenges of childhood disability: A Qualitative study in Iran
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".