Illuminating five possible dimensions of self-care during the COVID-19 pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Self-care is about taking care of yourself. It is a proactive action involving steps to develop, protect, maintain and improve health, wellbeing or wellness. Self-care can be seen as a repertoire of practices – different things you do that help you care for you, no matter how small. It is an act of treating yourself like you would a close friend. The importance of valuing self-care has not changed in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, in fact more awareness and appreciation for what one can do to empower yourself may indeed be valued more.
 
 Methods: In this paper, I draw on data from 53 participants aged over 18 years who responded to an online qualitative questionnaire between the months of May to June in 2020. Poetry derived from all the participants has been generated to both represent their voice and to provide a provocation that ignites our heart and mind to consider what is good in life.
 
 Results: To further conceptualise self-care, five possible dimensions of self-care (mindfulness, self-compassion, habits, time and agency) are suggested and the aspects within these dimensions are described juxtaposed with poetic representation that illuminates practices and mindsets engaged with during a pandemic. 
 
 Conclusions: When thinking about self-care across five possible dimensions, this framework becomes useful for capturing a holistic and authentic view of both proactive actions and the variety of practices that can be engaged with. Empowerment is possible in partnership with self-compassion and awareness, where a self-kindness supports proactive decisions to be made on a daily basis that support wellbeing. Central is that no matter one’s situation, difficulty and suffering during a pandemic, gratitude and awareness for oneself is possible.
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) | 0.005 | 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".