MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3199506368 · doi:10.1177/00302228211045288

Exploring the Use of Virtual Funerals during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Scoping Review

2021· review· en· W3199506368 on OpenAlexaff
Andie MacNeil, Blythe Findlay, Rennie Bimman, Taylor Hocking, Tali Barclay, Jacqueline Ho

Bibliographic record

VenueOMEGA - Journal of Death and Dying · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPandemicSocial distanceCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Coping (psychology)Grey literatureWork (physics)DistancingGrief2019-20 coronavirus outbreakResource (disambiguation)Inclusion (mineral)Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)PsychologySociologyMEDLINEMedicinePolitical scienceSocial scienceComputer scienceEngineeringPsychotherapistDiseaseVirology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The COVID-19 pandemic and physical distancing limitations have had a profound impact on funeral practices and associated grieving processes. The purpose of the present scoping review is to summarize the existing literature on the emerging use of virtual funerals. Five medical databases, five social science databases, and five grey literature databases were searched, identifying 1,351 titles and abstracts, of which 62 met inclusion criteria. Four themes, each with various subthemes emerged: (a) Impact of virtual funerals on coping with death; (b) Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the funeral industry; (c) Benefits and disadvantages of virtual funerals; and (d) Future implications for health and social work practitioners. Virtual funerals are an evolving resource for individuals, families, and communities to mourn in response to the interruptions to traditional grieving practices due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.798
Threshold uncertainty score0.782

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.530
GPT teacher head0.472
Teacher spread0.059 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations32
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOMEGA - Journal of Death and DyingSame topicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207