MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2013337506 · doi:10.1111/nin.12063

Bourdieu at the bedside: briefing parents in a pediatric hospital

2014· article· en· W2013337506 on OpenAlexafffund
Karen LeGrow, Ellen Hodnett, Robyn Stremler, Patricia McKeever, Eyal Cohen

Bibliographic record

VenueNursing Inquiry · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFamily and Patient Care in Intensive Care Units
Canadian institutionsHolland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation HospitalUniversity of TorontoToronto Metropolitan UniversityHospital for Sick Children
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsRedressHabitusFamily centered carePerspective (graphical)NursingIntervention (counseling)Health careMedicinePsychologySociologyPolitical scienceSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The philosophy of family-centered care (FCC) promotes partnerships between families and staff to plan, deliver, and evaluate services for children and has been officially adopted by a majority of pediatric hospitals throughout North America. However, studies indicated that many parents have continued to be dissatisfied with their decision-making roles in their child's care. This is particularly salient for parents of children with chronic ongoing complex health problems. These children are dependent upon medical technology and require frequent hospitalizations during which parents must contribute to difficult decisions regarding their child's care. Given this clinical issue, an alternative theoretical perspective was explored to redress this problem. Pierre Bourdieu's theoretical concepts of field, capital, and habitus were used to analyze the hierarchical relationships in pediatric acute care hospitals and to design a briefing intervention aimed at improving parents' satisfaction with decision making in that health care setting.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.250
Threshold uncertainty score0.637

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.075
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.322 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNursing InquirySame topicFamily and Patient Care in Intensive Care UnitsFrench-language works237,207