MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2033278232 · doi:10.12968/ijpn.2004.10.3.12469

The experience of family members caring for a dying loved one

2004· article· en· W2033278232 on OpenAlexaff
Annie Perreault, Frances Fothergill‐Bourbonnais, Valerie Fiset

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Palliative Nursing · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsAlgonquin CollegeUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLearned helplessnessPalliative careNursingHealth professionalsEmotional supportFace (sociological concept)Qualitative researchFamily memberPsychologyMedicineFamily caregiversEmpathyHealth careSocial supportPsychotherapistSocial psychologyFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Qualitative nursing research into the experience of family members caring for a dying loved one has been limited. This study used a phenomenological approach to explore this experience. The pattern of caring for a dying loved one and its intertwined dimensions were described. Caregivers felt a sense of helplessness that was associated with illness progression, their inability to relieve pain and discomfort, and decision-making related to patient admission to a palliative care unit. Lack of support from health professionals and having to face personal limits were found to accelerate the decision to admit a patient. The role of a support person involved with the caregiver was also considered and found to be an area worthy of further investigation. Health professionals must provide information and support tailored to the caregivers' needs as they change along a patient's illness trajectory.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0160.014
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.184
GPT teacher head0.472
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations63
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Palliative NursingSame topicPalliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesFrench-language works237,207