Imagining Futures Amidst the Uncertainty of Living: A Critical Participatory Action Research Project with Adolescents and Young Adults with Lived Experiences with Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper we share key insights from an 18-month participatory research project exploring the lived experiences and realities of cancer among racialized adolescents and young adults (AYAs). Written collaboratively with adolescent and young adult co-thinkers, we discuss the creative methodologies used in the study, critical and imaginative frameworks within Indigenous, Black and queer of colour theorizing, and the value of an interdisciplinary approach for understanding the cancer care experiences of racialized adolescents and young adults. The analysis explores five core research themes, which highlight what the project offered to the adolescents and young adults who participated: a place to meaningfully participate, to be understood in their complexity, to create and be creative, to be in community, and to imagine their desired futures. We argue for a meaningful and inclusive engagement of AYAs in cancer care systems and research, urging healthcare practitioners and researchers to recognize the complexities of AYAs' lives and experiences. Ultimately, we advocate for transformative changes in cancer care research and practice, with the goal of supporting AYAs as active agents in their own care and futures.
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 | 0.048 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.014 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| 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".