A holistic approach to supporting death in the home: Implementation of a home hospice program in a northern community–A study protocol
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
INTRODUCTION: To enhance support for individuals at end of life to die at home, a new community-driven home-based hospice program was developed-Home Hospice. This wholistic hospice care program, co-designed by hospice care staff, community end-of-life care providers, researchers, and health systems decision-makers, will provide around the clock care to clients and their families. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This mixed methods study, guided by a process evaluation framework, will use secondary client and caregiver data collected as part of regular Home Hospice program processes, as well as primary interview data collected from caregivers at least three months post-death of the client and from hospice staff and volunteers involved in the Home Hospice program. Analysis will include descriptive statistical analysis of quantitative data and thematic analysis employing an inductive and a deductive qualitative analysis approach. ETHICS: Ethics approval has been received from the University of Northern British Columbia (File No: 6009117). All individuals and caregivers who enroll in the Home Hospice program will be invited to participate in this study. At three months post-death of the client, hospice staff will contact caregivers to ask if they would like to participate in a one-on-one interview with a research team member. Staff and volunteers will also be eligible to participate in one-on-one interviews with research team members. De-identified participant data will be provided by hospice staff to the research team. All participants will provide informed consent prior to participation in the study. DISSEMINATION: This study will use an integrated Knowledge Translation/Knowledge Mobilization (iKTKM) lens wherein the research team will work closely and meaningfully with knowledge users and community partners at all stages. Evidence-based and targeted iKTKM products will be created, including community event presentations and social media posts to share findings with participant and community audiences. Further, findings will be disseminated at conferences, workshops, and policy rounds with academic and decision-making audiences. Preliminary and full project findings will be published in high-quality open access journals. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS OF THIS STUDY: Co-design of Home Hospice program and evaluation metrics involves researchers, hospice staff, health systems decision-makers, and community members.Evaluation metrics involve prospective collection of service utilization from client, family, hospice, and health systems perspectives.Integrated knowledge translation approach which frames the knowledge dissemination plan for the study findings focuses on a range of audiences, including local citizens, hospice and community end-of-life care providers, health systems decision-makers, and academic professionals.As a one-year pilot study, the number of clients who may be able to participate in this program will be approximately 50 persons.
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 | 0,038 | 0,016 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,007 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,005 | 0,004 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,005 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,024 | 0,003 |
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 ».