MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2023051935 · doi:10.1089/jpm.2005.8.69

Service Preferences Among Family Caregivers of the Terminally Ill

2005· article· en· W2023051935 on OpenAlexafffund
Kevin Brazil, Michel Bédard, Paul Krueger, Tom Abernathy, Lynne Lohfeld, Kathleen Willison

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Palliative Medicine · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsVictorian Order of NursesHamilton Health SciencesLakehead UniversityMcMaster UniversitySt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonSt Joseph's Health Centre
FundersOntario Ministry of Health and Long-Term CareCanadian Health Services Research Foundation
KeywordsRespite careMedicineFamily caregiversTerminally illNursingPalliative careHousekeepingService (business)Family medicineSocial supportPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The ability of families to assume caregiving responsibilities is contingent on material, social, and professional support. Inadequate or inappropriate support to the terminally ill and their family caregivers can result in the misuse of resources and add burden to the family. In this report, we describe service preferences among informal caregivers of the terminally ill. DESIGN: Three hundred seventy-three caregivers participated in telephone interviews at two points in time: when the terminally ill person was designated as palliative and 5 months subsequent to the first interview. In the case that the care recipient died during the study period, the caregiver participated in the interview three months after the death. MEASURES: After reviewing possible services received by the care recipients and caregivers, caregivers were asked to identify the five services they found most valuable and which services they would have liked to have had or received more of when caregiving. RESULTS: The five services caregivers reported as most valuable included: in-home nursing care, (90.7%); family physicians, (45.6%); medical specialists, (46.4%); housekeeping, (23.6%); and, religious support, (11.3%). The five most frequently reported services that family caregivers would have liked to have received or had more available included: housekeeping, (13.1%); caregiver respite, (10.2%); in-home nursing care, (8.0%); personal support workers, (4.6%); and, self-help/support groups, (3.8%). Analyses revealed that most (64.8%) perceived service needs were of a supportive nature for caregivers. Caregiver perceptions of the value and perceived need of services were consistent over time and into bereavement. Logistic regression analyses suggested that younger caregivers who were not employed, reported higher levels of burden and cared for someone with a diagnosis of cancer had greater perceived service needs. CONCLUSIONS: The findings reported in this paper provide important insights into caregiver perceptions of valued services when caring for a terminally ill family member. These finding also highlight the stability of caregiver service perceptions over time and into bereavement.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.418

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Citations55
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Palliative MedicineSame topicPalliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesFrench-language works237,207