Spread, participant experience, and implementation of Pallium Canada’s Palliative Care ECHO project: a mixed methods study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Pallium Canada's Palliative Care Extension for Community (ECHO) Project (PC ECHO) is a five-year national initiative (launched April 2021) to support continuous professional development and to facilitate the integration of palliative care across different care settings. PC ECHO includes a superhub (Pallium Canada) and several partner hubs. The goal of this formative evaluation study is to explore the project's early spread and the experiences of hub partners and participants from April 2021 to September 2023. METHODS: A mixed-methods approach was used. Webinar and participant demographic information was collected by Pallium Canada's online learning management system and by partner hubs. Participants' experience feedback was collected through a standardized online evaluation form. Project leads at the superhub and three inaugural partners were interviewed and transcriptions subjected to a thematic analysis. RESULTS: A total of 301 sessions were delivered during the study period; 155 (51%) by Pallium Canada and 146 (49%) by nine partner hubs. Of these, 125 (42%) were standalone-type sessions and 176 (58%) were community of practice (COP)- or series-type sessions. A total of 7648 individuals - representing over 17 professions - participated across the 301 sessions; the nursing professions were the largest group (36.8%). There was a total of 17,467 participations across the 301 sessions, with participants from across Canada and 31% from rural or small population centres. 5105 evaluations of sessions were received (response rate 29%). Of these, 90% stated they "Agreed" or "Strongly Agreed" that the sessions were good learning experiences, and 93% indicated that they would recommend the session to colleagues. Project strengths and facilitators included accelerating partners' palliative care mandates, increased connections to other partners and resources, flexibility with the ECHO model, and funding received. CONCLUSION: The intended outcomes of the PC ECHO Project are materializing, including utility for participants and helping partner hubs accelerate their palliative care mandates. There is evidence of significant spread, over a relatively short period of time. Future studies should include further exploration of the respective roles and impact of different session types (standalone versus communities of practice and series) and impact at higher patient and health system levels.
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 | 0,000 |
| 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 ».