Meaning in life after cancer: Validation of the sources of meaning card method among participants in cancer rehabilitation

Author:

Sørensen Victoria H.1,Andersen Aida H.1ORCID,Andersen Tonny1ORCID,Rasmussen Annette23ORCID,Aagesen Maria234ORCID,Schnell Tatjana56ORCID,Pedersen Heidi F.7ORCID,la Cour Peter5ORCID,Rottmann Nina123ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Psychology, Faculty of Health Sciences University of Southern Denmark Odense Denmark

2. REHPA, The Danish Knowledge Centre for Rehabilitation and Palliative Care Odense University Hospital Nyborg Denmark

3. Department of Clinical Research University of Southern Denmark Odense Denmark

4. Occupational Science, User Perspectives and Community‐Based Interventions, Department of Public Health University of Southern Denmark Odense Denmark

5. MF Norwegian School of Theology, Religion and Society Oslo Norway

6. Institute of Psychology, University of Innsbruck Innsbruck Austria

7. Department of Clinical Medicine Research Clinic for Functional Disorders, Aarhus University Aarhus Denmark

Abstract

Cancer survivors may be struggling to re‐create meaning in life. Addressing their personal sources of meaning can support them in this process. The sources of meaning card method (SoMeCaM) aims to map and explore personal sources of meaning in a 1‐h session. It includes 26 cards, each with a statement on a source of meaning. The purpose of this study was to validate the statements on the sources of meaning cards for use among participants in cancer rehabilitation by examining whether participants attribute the same meaning to the statements as intended. The three step test interview method was used to assess response processes to the sources of meaning cards among 12 participants in a 5‐day cancer rehabilitation program in Denmark. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using framework analysis. Nineteen of the 26 statements were interpreted congruently, that is, in line with the underlying theory, by all participants. Issues of incongruency, ambiguity and confusion were observed in participants' interpretations of the statements on religiosity (n = 6), spirituality (n = 10), and reason (n = 6). Minor issues were observed for the statements on practicality, achievement, knowledge, and attentiveness. In most statements, cancer survivors' interpretation aligned with the underlying theory. Problems were apparent regarding the sources of meaning religiosity, spirituality and reason, and a reconsideration of the wording of the statements is recommended. These problems may be due to cultural and linguistic interpretations rather than to being a cancer survivor. Future studies could focus on these issues in other target populations. Despite these minor issues, the SoMeCaM has proven useful in addressing the important topic of meaning in life in the cancer rehabilitation setting. Clinicians should pay attention to nuances in participants' understanding of the cards.

Funder

Kræftens Bekæmpelse

Publisher

Wiley

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3