The development and validation of a novel questionnaire to measure patient and family satisfaction with end-of-life care: the Canadian Health Care Evaluation Project (CANHELP) Questionnaire
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
The purpose of this study was to further validate a novel instrument to measure satisfaction with end-of-life care, called the Canadian Health Care Evaluation Project (CANHELP) questionnaire. Data were collected by a cross-sectional survey of patients who had advanced, life-limiting illnesses and their family caregivers, and who completed CANHELP, a global rating of satisfaction, and a quality of life questionnaire. We conducted factor analysis, assessed internal consistency using Cronbach's alpha, and evaluated construct validity by describing the correlation amongst CANHELP, global rating of satisfaction and the quality of life questionnaire scores. There were 361 patient and 193 family questionnaires available for analysis. In the factor analysis, we identified six easily interpretable factors which explained 55.4% and 60.2% of the variance for the patient and caregiver questionnaire, respectively. For the patient version, the subscales derived from these factors were Relationship with Doctors, Illness Management, Communication, Decision-Making, Role of the Family, and Your Well-being. For the family questionnaire, the factors were Relationship with Doctors, Characteristics of Doctors and Nurses, Illness Management, Communication and Decision-Making, Your Involvement, and Your Well-being. Each subscale for each questionnaire had acceptable to excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha ranged from 0.69-0.94). We observed good correlations between the CANHELP overall satisfaction score and global rating of satisfaction (correlation coefficient 0.49 and 0.63 for patient and family, respectively) which was greater than the correlations between CANHELP and the quality of life instruments. We conclude that the CANHELP Questionnaire is a valid and internally consistent instrument to measure satisfaction with end-of-life care.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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