Understanding of the term “palliative care”: A Canadian survey
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This article examines the results of two studies conducted in Atlantic Canada to evaluate people's understanding of palliative care. In Study 1, a sample of adults were asked to respond to a brief survey. Respondents were asked if they had ever heard of palliative care. Those who answered "yes" were asked to respond to a number of additional questions about palliative care. The results of Study 1 revealed that over three-quarters of the respondents (75.3 percent) had heard of palliative care, however, only about half of these (48.4 percent) defined it as care for terminally ill or dying persons. Of those who had heard of palliative care, the vast majority (92.3 percent) said they would use palliative care services if they had a terminally ill family member In Study 2, respondents were presented with a written description of palliative care. After reading the description, respondents were asked to indicate whether or not they knew (prior to reading the description) what palliative care was. Those who answered "yes" were asked to provide a written explanation of how they first learned about palliative care; those who answered "no" were asked to provide written suggestions of how they believed information about palliative care should be disseminated to the public. The results revealed that 60.5 percent of the respondents knew about palliative care before reading the description. Of those who knew about palliative care, 40.8 percent of them first learned about it through personal experience with the death of a family member or close friend. Of those who did not know what palliative care was, the suggestions they gave for creating community awareness of palliative care included: information disseminated by healthcare providers, use of pamphlets, the media, and the church.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».