MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Interhospital variability in satisfaction with withdrawal of life support: Room for improvement?

2003· article· en· W2023244418 on OpenAlexaff
Sean Keenan, Cathy Mawdsley, Donna Plotkin, William J. Sibbald

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care Medicine · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsCentre for Advancing Health OutcomesSt. Paul's HospitalLondon Health Sciences CentreRoyal Columbian Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIntensive careIntensive care unitNursingSedationRespiratory careLife satisfactionMEDLINELife supportFamily medicinePsychologyPsychiatryIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To develop instruments to measure the current level of satisfaction with the withdrawal of life support among nurses and respiratory therapists and to use these instruments to determine whether differences in satisfaction levels with the withdrawal of life support could be found among different institutions. DESIGN: A multicenter, self-administered, questionnaire-based study. SETTING: The intensive care units of three academic and 11 community hospitals. SUBJECTS: A total of 412 critical care nurses and 117 respiratory therapists working in these intensive care units. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: After developing two similar questionnaires for critical care nurses and respiratory therapists, we assessed the reliability of the individual items for each questionnaire and only used those found to be reliable in the analyses. We found variability in the satisfaction level of critical care nurses among different intensive care units and among academic and community hospital intensive care units. Being involved in the plan for withdrawal of life support, comfort with the way discussions with the family had gone, comfort with patient sedation, and increasing experience with withdrawal of life support were items associated with increased nurse satisfaction. For respiratory therapists, there seemed to be similar differences among institutions in satisfaction level, although numbers were limited. Having the physician explain the plan to them and becoming more comfortable with withdrawal of life support as a result of increased experience were found to be associated with increased satisfaction levels for respiratory therapists. CONCLUSIONS: Satisfaction levels of intensive care unit nurses and respiratory therapists with the process of withdrawing life support vary among institutions. This variation may represent an opportunity for improvement in the process of withdrawing life support within this region.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.034
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.034
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.344 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations17
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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