MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2027351083 · doi:10.1177/0269216311431311

Understanding Compassion Satisfaction, Compassion Fatigue and Burnout: A survey of the hospice palliative care workforce

2011· article· en· W2027351083 on OpenAlexafffund
Suzanne L. Slocum-Gori, David Hemsworth, Winnie Chan, Anna Carson, Arminée Kazanjian

Bibliographic record

VenuePalliative Medicine · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
Canadian institutionsNipissing UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsBurnoutCompassion fatigueCompassionWorkforcePalliative careMedicineNursingJob satisfactionHealth carePsychologyFamily medicineClinical psychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Despite the increasingly crucial role of the healthcare workforce and volunteers working in hospice and palliative care (HPC), very little is known about factors that promote or limit the positive outcomes associated with practicing compassion. AIM: The purpose of this study was to: 1) understand the complex relationships among Compassion Satisfaction, Compassion Fatigue and Burnout within the hospice and palliative care workforce and 2) explore how key practice characteristics - practice status, professional affiliation, and principal institution - interact with the measured constructs of Compassion Satisfaction, Compassion Fatigue and Burnout. DESIGN: Self-reported measures of Compassion Satisfaction, Compassion Fatigue and Burnout, using validated scales, as well as questions to describe socio-demographic profiles and key practice characteristics were obtained. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: A national survey of HPC workers, comprising clinical, administrative, allied health workers and volunteers, was completed. Respondents from hospital, community-based and care homes informed the results of our study (n = 630). RESULTS: Our results indicate a significant negative correlation between Compassion Satisfaction and Burnout (r = -0.531, p < 0.001) and between Compassion Satisfaction and Compassion Fatigue (r = -0.208, p < 0.001), and a significant positive correlation between Burnout and Compassion Fatigue (r = 0.532, p < 0.001). Variations in self-reported levels of the above constructs were noted by key practice characteristics. Levels of all three constructs are significantly, but differentially, affected by type of service provided, principal institution, practice status and professional affiliation. Results indicate that health care systems could increase the prevalence of Compassion Satisfaction through both policy and institutional level programs to support HPC professionals in their jurisdictions.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.431
GPT teacher head0.466
Teacher spread0.035 · 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

Citations275
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePalliative MedicineSame topicHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnoutFrench-language works237,207