‘Between Inner Strength and Fighting Prejudice’: Psycho-Social Processes Implemented by Women with Leukemia Along the Illness Trajectory: A Grounded Theory Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Disease trajectories in leukemia are often unpredictable and recurrent, and patients' experiences can impact their quality of life. Studies in the literature often do not explore gender-related illness experiences from an intersectional approach and throughout the illness trajectory. This comprehensive study aims to explore the full spectrum of experiences lived by women with leukemia throughout the disease trajectory, from diagnosis to treatments and post-stem cell transplant follow-up. METHOD: A grounded theory approach was meticulously developed to analyze semi-structured interviews with 13 women with leukemia in the post-transplant follow-up phase at a hospital in Northern Italy. The data analysis was an iterative process, conducted concurrently using a constant comparative method. Data collection concluded when data saturation was reached. RESULTS: The core category identified is women's inner strength during the disease trajectory, which was identified for its recurrence and cross-cutting nature, according to the women. This core category interconnects with five main categories: 1. Facing the disease: Between resistance and surrender. 2. Living for today and moving forward. 3. Unexpected elements in relationships. 4. Changes that shape women. 5. Demystifying the body and embracing 'diminished beauty'. CONCLUSIONS: An explanatory model of the disease trajectory of women with leukemia was defined as: 'Women with leukemia, between inner strength and fighting prejudice'. An in-depth analysis of the disease experiences revealed aspects that are not easily understood through a purely biological perspective of gender differences, often overlooking the psycho-social and relational peculiarities of women.
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 | 0.012 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".