MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4239352475 · doi:10.24124/2008/bpgub1367

A journey through unexpected sibling bereavement: an adolescent's grief and struggle to find meaning in adulthood

2008· dissertation· en· W4239352475 on OpenAlexaff
Dana Norbeck

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaUniversity of Northern British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGriefSiblingSisterPsychologyPerspective (graphical)Disenfranchised griefDevelopmental psychologyMeaning (existential)PsychotherapistSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although extensive research relating to adolescent bereavement exists, studies relating specifically to adolescent sibling bereavement are limited in scope and rarely provide a longitudinal perspective. This study implements autoethnography to reveal a retrospective of the author's personal experience with grief after the unexpected death of her only sister during adolescence. The case study provides a longitudinal perspective of adolescent sibling bereavement as the author examines her grief from the moment that she found out her sister was killed, through to the present day, 22 years later. The author reveals many short-term and long-term effects of grief while examining her own experiences from both adolescent and adult perspectives. Also provided is an introduction to other literature on the topic. The study will present families, teachers, counselors, and other community members, with a more in-depth look at adolescent sibling bereavement, its long-term impacts, and suggestions for supporting an adolescent experiencing grief after the death of a sibling.--P.ii.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.320 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental Health→French-language works237,207→