Experience of hope: An exploratory research with bereaved mothers following perinatal death
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PROBLEM: The negative implications of perinatal death on mothers' mental health are documented, however little is known about their experience of hope. BACKGROUND: Within the broader literature, hope has contributed to better mental health and bereavement adjustment and often bereaved mothers report the importance of hope for the grieving process. AIM: This study aims to explore bereaved mothers' experience of hope following perinatal death. METHODS: Individual interviews were conducted with 33 mothers having experienced the death of an infant in the perinatal period. Data from the interviews were analysed using thematic analysis. FINDINGS: The mothers' experience of hope following perinatal loss is organized into three themes: Hope disrupted by perinatal loss; Transformed hope: a new pregnancy challenged by the sense of foreboding of another loss; and Ways to restore and foster hope in life. DISCUSSION: Although hope has been a motivating force for mothers to reconnect with their life plan and move on after a loss, it is also negatively affected by the experience of perinatal bereavement, social support, and health professionals' clinical practice. CONCLUSION: Bereaved mothers have reported a disruption in their experience of hope. While some experience a loss of hope or a sense of hopelessness, others experience a transformation and restoration of hope, which is reinvested in the grieving process. Mothers' experience of hope highlights the need for the support of a healthcare professional and may contribute to enhanced clinical practice through the promotion of bereavement care, considering the aspects that instil, maintain, and interfere with hope.
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 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".