Conceptions of Legacy Among People Making Treatment Choices for Serious Illness: Protocol for a Scoping Review
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Legacy-what one leaves behind and how one hopes to be remembered after death-is an unexplored and important dimension of decision-making for people facing serious illnesses. A preliminary literature review suggests that patients facing serious illness consider legacy when making medical decisions, for example, forgoing expensive treatment with limited or unknown clinical benefit to preserve one's inheritance for their children. To date, very little is known about the conceptual foundations of legacy. No conceptual frameworks exist that provide a comprehensive understanding of how legacy considerations relate to patient choices about their medical care. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this scoping review is to understand the extent and type of research addressing the concept of legacy by people facing serious illness to inform a conceptual framework of legacy and patient treatment choices. METHODS: This protocol follows the guidelines put forth by Levac et al, which expands the framework introduced by Arksey and O'Malley, as well as the Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewer's manual. This scoping review will explore several electronic databases including PubMed, Medline, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, and others and will include legacy-specific gray literature, including dissertation research available via ProQuest. An initial search will be conducted in English-language literature from 1990 to the present with selected keywords to identify relevant articles and refine the search strategy. After the search strategy has been finalized, 2 independent reviewers will undertake a 2-part study selection process. In the first step, reviewers will screen article titles and abstracts to identify the eligibility of each article based on predetermined exclusion or inclusion criteria. A third senior reviewer will arbitrate discrepancies regarding inclusions or exclusions. During the second step, the full texts will be screened by 2 reviewers, and only relevant articles will be kept. Relevant study data will be extracted, collated, and charted to summarize the key findings related to the construct of legacy. RESULTS: This study will identify how people facing serious illness define legacy, and how their thinking about legacy impacts the choices they make about their medical treatments. We will note gaps in the literature base. The findings of this study will inform a conceptual model that outlines how ideas about legacy impact the patient's treatment choices. The results of this study will be submitted to an indexed journal. CONCLUSIONS: Very little is known about the role of legacy in the treatment decisions of patients across the continuum of serious illness. In particular, no comprehensive conceptual model exists that would provide an understanding of how legacy is considered by people making decisions about their care during serious illness. This study will be among the first to construct a conceptual model detailing how considerations of legacy impact medical decision-making for people facing or living with serious illnesses. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/40791.
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,142 | 0,172 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,006 | 0,006 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,013 | 0,016 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,017 | 0,017 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,006 | 0,007 |
| Communication savante | 0,009 | 0,010 |
| Science ouverte | 0,007 | 0,008 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,013 | 0,009 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,072 | 0,013 |
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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».