The centrality of nursing in realizing high quality palliative care: Exploring Canada’s framework on palliative care priorities
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Following an earlier mixed-method survey in which we asked stakeholders to report on their perceptions of the progress made in relation to Canada's Framework on Palliative Care and Action Plan, the purpose of this study was to conduct an in-depth qualitative exploration of the factors influencing that progress, or lack thereof. METHODS: This was a qualitative interview study conducted in Canada. Inclusion criteria included experience with palliative care in Canada in a professional or volunteer capacity. Interviews were conducted by telephone using an interview guide that asked specific questions in relation to the Framework on palliative care priorities (e.g., education, caregiver support, and equitable access). Data was analyzed using qualitative descriptive methods. RESULTS: Thirty-five diverse stakeholders with extensive experience in palliative care were interviewed. In relation to palliative education, participants indicated that although there were excellent palliative care resources available across the country there was further need for embedding palliative care in undergraduate education and for mentored opportunities to engage in care across diverse contexts. The identification, development, and strategic positioning of champions was an important strategy for improving palliative care knowledge and capacity. The development of standard competencies was viewed as an important step forward; although, there was a need to include more members of the care-team and to create pathways for life-long learning. In relation to support for family caregivers, even as participants cited numerous community-based resources offered by not-for-profit organizations, they described significant barriers including a shortage of in-home support, lack of understanding of what caregivers do, and policy-based contractual and privacy issues. In relation to palliative care access, participants described a nurse-centered, consult-based, multi-site and multi-provider model of care that was facilitated by technology. Barriers to this model were systemic healthcare issues of siloed, fragmented, and for-profit care. CONCLUSION: Participants in this study had clear insights into the factors that would support or impede progress to the development of palliative care in Canada. Some of those factors were achievable within current health and educational systems. Other factors were going to require longer term and more comprehensive solutions.
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 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| 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 ».