Exploring the psychological effects of deceased organ donation on the families of the organ donors
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Our specific aim was to investigate whether the donation process hindered or ameliorated the bereavement process for organ donor families, specifically with regard to depression, post-traumatic stress and grief. METHODS: Using the British Columbia Transplant Society (BCTS) database, we mailed packages to donor families who consented to and successfully proceeded to donate. Each package contained three standardized, validated questionnaires that included scales of depression, post-traumatic stress, and bereavement. We also included a newly designed questionnaire specific to the BCTS Donation Experience. Seventy-three completed packages were received and analyzed using multiple regression models. Our overall response rate was 46%. RESULTS: The younger the deceased and the shorter the time elapsed since donation, the greater the strength of bereaved feelings reported by the donor families. If donor families felt there were negative aspects about the donation process, the more likely they were bothered by symptoms of post-traumatic stress. The more comforted donor families felt about donation, the less likely they were bothered by feelings of depression. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that donation has a beneficial effect on the bereavement process.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it