A Real-Life Laboratory Setting for Clinical Practice, Education, and Research in Family Systems Care: Protocol for a Transformational Action Research Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Burdening health and illness issues such as physical or mental illnesses, accidents, disabilities, and life events such as birth or death influence the health and functioning of families and contribute to the complexity of care and health care costs. Considerable research has confirmed the benefits of a family systems-centered care approach for patients, family caregivers, families, and health care professionals. However, health care professionals face barriers in working with families, such as feeling unprepared. Family systems-centered therapeutic conversations support families' day-to-day coping, resilience, and health. A family systems care unit (FSCU) was recently established as a real-life laboratory at one of the Swiss Universities of Applied Sciences. In this unit, health care professionals offer therapeutic conversations to families and individual family members to support daily symptom management and functioning, soften suffering, and increase health and well-being. These conversations are observed in real time through a 1-way window by other health care professionals, students, and trainees and are recorded with video for research and education. Little is known about how therapeutic conversations contribute to meaningful changes in burdened families and the benefits of vicarious learning in a real-life laboratory setting for family systems care. OBJECTIVE: In this research program, we aim to deepen our understanding of how therapeutic conversations support families and individuals experiencing burdening health and illness issues and how the FSCU laboratory setting supports the learning of students, clinical trainees, and health care professionals. METHODS: Here we apply a transformational action research design, including parallel and subsequent substudies, to advance knowledge and practice in family systems care. Qualitative multiple-case study designs will be used to explore the benefits of therapeutic conversations by analyzing recordings of the therapeutic conversations. The learning processes of students, trainees, and professionals will be investigated with descriptive qualitative study designs based on single and focus group interviews. The data will be analyzed with established coding methods. RESULTS: Therapeutic conversations have been investigated in 3 single-case studies, each involving a sequence of 3 therapeutic conversation units. Data collection regarding the second research question is planned. CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary results confirm the therapeutic conversations to support families' coping. This renders the FSCU a setting for ethically sensitive research. This program will not only support the health and well-being of families, but also contribute to relieving the financial and workforce burdens in the health and social care system. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/53090.
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 | 0,111 | 0,089 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,006 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,008 | 0,006 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,006 | 0,007 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,008 | 0,006 |
| Communication savante | 0,006 | 0,005 |
| Science ouverte | 0,005 | 0,006 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,008 | 0,011 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,079 | 0,020 |
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 ».