Relaxation Therapy and Mindfulness Meditation One-Day Workshop for Nephrology Social Workers: Exploring the Impact of This Training on Professional Practice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Relaxation therapy techniques and mindfulness meditation are clinical intervention tools that have demonstrated benefits associated with the reduction of negative psychological states and the enhancement of positive states of mind critical to the alleviation of physical and emotional distress (Jain et al., 2007). Many mind-body therapeutic training workshops are offered in a one-day format; however, there is a gap in the literature examining the direct impact of learning relaxation therapy and mindfulness meditation specific to nephrology social work practitioners, and how, if at all, learning these techniques might assist a practitioner in his/her work. A study was undertaken to examine the influence of a one-day relaxation therapy and mindfulness meditation educational workshop on nephrology social workers’ professional practice. Eight members of the Canadian Association of Nephrology Social Workers with limited previous exposure to mind-body therapeutic approaches participated in this project. Telephone and Skype participant interviews occurred following the workshop on three separate occasions over a period of four months. The key findings from this study suggest that 1) the workshop had an impact on professional practice, 2) the workshop had an impact on self-care, and 3) amid obstacles to implementation, nephrology social workers expressed their desire to expand their current scope of practice to include relaxation therapy techniques and mindfulness meditation with their clients.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".