Bereavement support group for parents who have experienced the death of an adult child to cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The focus of this practicum was to provide a safe, supportive place where parents, whose adult children had died of cancer, could share their feelings with other parents who had experienced the same kind of loss. The theoretical approach taken was one of a combined support group and psycho/educational format. The goal of the bereavement support group was to promote the supportive atmosphere of the group while at the same time provide an educational component. The educational component was an important one in the sense that the participants learned that grief was a process which they could share with others. They learned that they were not alone in their journey. Group members met other parents whose child had died of cancer and who were experiencing the same grief reactions. The evaluation of the group's progress included mid-point and final questionnaires completed by members of the group and a structured practitioner log. The bereavement support group experience provided me the opportunity to achieve a number of educational goals which included developing an increased awareness of what parents experience when their adult child dies of cancer, enhancing skills in interviewing about loss, exploring grief and loss issues with parent survivors in a support group setting, building skills in assessment and evaluation, honing my skills as a bereavement support group facilitator and evaluating the support group intervention process, learning how this process contributed to grief resolution
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.002 |
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".