MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3158423103 · doi:10.1177/10499091211011712

Quality of Life for Older Cancer Patients: Relation of Psychospiritual Distress to Meaning-Making During Dignity Therapy

2021· article· en· W3158423103 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine® · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPatient Dignity and Privacy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaResearch Institute in Oncology and HematologyCancerCare Manitoba
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsDignityMeaning (existential)DistressMedicinePsychotherapistQuality of life (healthcare)Meaning-makingPalliative carePsychologyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Nearly 500,000 older Americans die a cancer-related death annually. Best practices for seriously ill patients include palliative care that aids in promoting personal dignity. Dignity Therapy is an internationally recognized therapeutic intervention designed to enhance dignity for the seriously ill. Theoretically, Dignity Therapy provides opportunity for patients to make meaning by contextualizing their illness within their larger life story. The extent to which Dignity Therapy actually elicits meaning-making from patients, however, has not been tested. Aim: The current study examines (i) extent of patient meaning-making during Dignity Therapy, and (ii) whether baseline psychospiritual distress relates to subsequent meaning-making during Dignity Therapy. Design: Participants completed baseline self-report measures of psychospiritual distress (i.e., dignity-related distress, spiritual distress, quality of life), before participating in Dignity Therapy. Narrative analysis identified the extent of meaning-making during Dignity Therapy sessions. Participants: Twenty-five outpatients ( M age = 63, SD = 5.72) with late-stage cancer and moderate cancer-related symptoms were recruited. Results: Narrative analysis revealed all patients made meaning during Dignity Therapy but there was wide variation (i.e., 1—12 occurrences). Patients who made greater meaning were those who, at baseline, reported significantly higher psychospiritual distress, including greater dignity-related distress ( r = .46), greater spiritual distress ( r = .44), and lower quality of life ( r = -.56). Conclusion: Meaning-making was found to be a central component of Dignity Therapy. Particularly, patients experiencing greater distress in facing their illness use the Dignity Therapy session to express how they have made meaning in their lives.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.431

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.070
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.331 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it