The Role of Career Development in the Process of Psychological Adaptation to Cancer: Re-Visiting the Task Model Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent years, advances in medi cine and improved treatments have extended the length of survival of can cer patients. Given such developments, cancer is increasingly perceived as a chronic illness. Therefore, it is impor tant to study how cancer survivors adapt over the course of their lives to this transition. This article proposes a theoretical model of adaptation to chronic illness referred to as the “task model.” This model embodies a phe nomenological perspective that focuses on a person’s subjective perceptions. Additionally, the task model provides us with a perspective from which we can gain a better understanding of how individuals who arc diagnosed with life threatening illnesses like cancer recon struct their existence by completing tasks such as physical, psychological, social, and spiritual. However, given that cancer patients are living longer and leading relatively normal lives, this article not only underlines the impor tance of work and career development in this particular process, but also rec ommends the addition of the aforemen tioned to the current task model.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".