Lived Experiences of “Illness Uncertainty” of Iranian Cancer Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: For cancer patients, uncertainty is a pervasive experience and a major psychological stressor that affects many aspects of their lives. Uncertainty is a multifaceted concept, and its understanding for patients depends on many factors, including factors associated with various sociocultural contexts. Unfortunately, little is known about the concept of uncertainty in Iranian society and culture. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to clarify the concept and explain lived experiences of illness uncertainty in Iranian cancer patients. METHODS: In this hermeneutic phenomenological study, 8 cancer patients participated in semistructured in-depth interviews about their experiences of uncertainty in illness. Interviews continued until data saturation was reached. All interviews were recorded, transcribed, analyzed, and interpreted using 6 stages of the van Manen phenomenological approach. RESULTS: Seven main themes emerged from patients' experiences of illness uncertainty of cancer. Four themes contributed to uncertainty including "Complexity of Cancer," "Confusion About Cancer," "Contradictory Information," and "Unknown Future." Two themes facilitated coping with uncertainty including "Seeking Knowledge" and "Need for Spiritual Peace." One theme, "Knowledge Ambivalence," revealed the struggle between wanting to know and not wanting to know, especially if bad news was delivered. CONCLUSION: Uncertainty experience for cancer patients in different societies is largely similar. However, some experiences (eg, ambiguity in access to medical resources) seemed unique to Iranian patients. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This study provided an outlook of cancer patients' experiences of illness uncertainty in Iran. Cancer patients' coping ability to deal with uncertainty can be improved.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".