Palliative care volunteerism among college students in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The goal of Study 1 was to investigate whether young Canadian adults were interested in becoming involved in palliative care volunteer work. After reading a brief description of what volunteering in a palliative care environment typically involves, participants (undergraduate students) were asked to indicate whether they would be interested in this kind of volunteer experience and to provide a written explanation of their answer. Of the 105 participating students, only 39 (37.1 percent) expressed an interest in volunteering, while 66 (62.9 percent) were not interested. Not surprisingly, the results revealed that significantly more females than males were interested in palliative care volunteer work (45.9 percent and 25.0 percent, respectively). The most common reason students gave for wanting to become a palliative care volunteer was to help others; the reason given most often for not wanting to volunteer was that it would be too emotionally demanding. It is important to note that prior to taking part in this study the majority of the participating students (75.9 percent) did not know what palliative care was. The goal of Study 2 was to investigate undergraduate students' interest in volunteering in a nursing home, in a classroom, and at a food bank. Of the 111 participating students, 74 (66.7 percent) expressed an interest in volunteering at a food bank and in a nursing home, and 89 (80.2 percent) were interested in becoming a classroom volunteer. Together, the results of Studies 1 and 2 support the view that young people in Canada (especially males) are not interested in becoming involved in the care of dying persons. However, the results also indicate that they are very interested in volunteering with other populations (e.g., the elderly, school children) and in other settings (e.g., food bank).
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".