MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019560819 · doi:10.1177/1367493511420183

Understanding the private worlds of physicians, nurses, and parents

2011· article· en· W2019560819 on OpenAlexaff
Franco A. Carnevale, Monica Benedetti, Amabile Bonaldi, Elena Bravi, Gaetano Trabucco, Paolo Biban

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Child Health Care · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFeelingSolitudeNursingFocus groupMedicineFamily medicinePsychologySocial psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study's aim was to describe: (a) How life-sustaining treatment (LST) decisions are made for critically ill children in Italy; and (b) How these decisional processes are experienced by physicians, nurses and parents. Focus groups with 16 physicians and 26 nurses, and individual interviews with 9 parents were conducted. Findings uncovered the 'private worlds' of paediatric intensive care unit (PICU) physicians, nurses and parents; they all suffer tremendously and privately. Physicians struggle with the weight of responsibility and solitude in making LST decisions. Nurses struggle with feelings of exclusion from decisions regarding patients and families that they care for. Physicians and nurses are distressed by legal barriers to LST withdrawal. Parents struggle with their dependence on physicians and nurses to provide care for their child and strive to understand what is happening to their child. Features of helpful and unhelpful communication with parents are highlighted, which should be considered in educational and practice changes.

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)0.000
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 score0.419
Threshold uncertainty score0.333

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.268 · 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

Citations30
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Child Health CareSame topicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207