Body image in women diagnosed with breast cancer: A grounded theory study
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Using a Straussian grounded theory methodology, we explored the meaning women attribute to body image and how they understand their breast cancer experience as influencing their body image to develop a grounded theory of body image for women diagnosed with breast cancer. Interviews were conducted with 27 women who had completed treatment for breast cancer in Canada. Data were analyzed through a process of open, axial, and selective coding using constant comparison techniques and memo-writing. A grounded theory of body image for women diagnosed with breast cancer was developed around the core category of body image: what it means to women, which was underpinned by six themes and 17 subthemes. This theory explains how women diagnosed with breast cancer define body image and illustrates intrapersonal and interpersonal factors that can undermine or support their body image, along with strategies they used to manage their body image. This theory can guide research and practice aimed at enhancing body image and minimizing its consequences for women diagnosed with breast cancer.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.006 | 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 it