Philosophical Feminist approach to breast Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Breast cancer is a major public health issue and it can impact individual’s lives in different dimensions. Although women are the ones most affected by this illness, there are other minority groups, such as men and transgender people, that are also affected and frequently ignored in healthcare approaches. People affected by breast cancer can face societal oppressions that puts them into a vulnerable situation where they need to deal with the suffering involved in have a serious illness and the societal expectations of the body. This situation can negatively influence an individual’s sense of identity and views of the body. As a result, it becomes necessary to dismantle the monolithic constructions on this collective, since these groups not only carry their gender identity but also the identities forged by social and cultural experiences. Thus, this article is a philosophical reflection to critically examine conceptual understandings of the body for individuals affected by breast cancer, to understand the influence of social interactions in this process based on the feminist philosophy, and to explore how nurses and healthcare professionals can help tackling this issue. Feminist thinking has become a crucial component of both political and sanitary philosophy and theory, and it is promoting a real "refoundation" of the political, philosophical, and theoretical dimensions. Therefore, it is important to healthcare professionals to use a philosophical feminist approach to breast cancer to help empowering these individuals and disassemble the constructions on this collective.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".