The Experiences of Bereaved Parents After the Loss of a Child to Cancer: A Qualitative Metasynthesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aims to synthesize qualitative evidence about the bereavement experience of parents following the death of a child due to cancer. A qualitative metasynthesis was conducted from searching five databases. The search identified 650 articles that were independently assessed by two reviewers. Thirty-one articles were selected for full-text reading and assessed for eligibility; a total of 14 articles were included in the final sample and submitted to quality appraisal. The software NVivo® was used to organize the data and support the thematic analysis procedures. Two analytical themes were constructed: (1) losing a child and facing a rupture in identity and sense of life and (2) surviving grief and reengaging in life. The grief process was dynamic, continuous, and begun before the death of the child. Fathers and mothers reacted differently to the loss and experience of grief. The loss of a child definitively changed the parents' life and caused identity crisis and loss of life's purpose. During the process of survival, parents constructed new meanings that helped them cope with grief; they used strategies that allowed them to recover their sense of purpose in life. Synthesizing the experience of bereaved parents is essential to improve the support families of children with advanced cancer receive to better cope with their suffering and loss, before and after the child's death.
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 | 0.028 | 0.063 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.016 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".