MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2035708689 · doi:10.1097/nhh.0b013e31824c2892

Resolving Moral Distress When Caring for Patients Who Smoke While Using Home Oxygen Therapy

2012· review· en· W2035708689 on OpenAlexaff
John William Kayser, Diane Nault, Gaston Ostiguy

Bibliographic record

VenueHome Healthcare Nurse · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEthics in medical practice
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreHôpital Maisonneuve-RosemontUniversité de MontréalMcGill UniversityBell (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDistressEmotional distressOxygen therapySmokePsychologyMedicineNursingPsychotherapistPsychiatryAnxiety

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

More than 1 million people in the United States use home oxygen therapy and its demand is growing. However, there are dangers associated with its use, such as burns and home fires, and smoking is the most common cause of these incidents. As a result, home healthcare nurses feel intense emotional distress when caring for patients who smoke while using home oxygen therapy. This distress arises from the nurse's competing sense of moral duties toward these patients. The purpose of this article is to describe this distress, then to propose a 3-step process of taking concrete actions to resolve the distress.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.939
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0030.011
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 head0.393
GPT teacher head0.535
Teacher spread0.142 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations6
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHome Healthcare NurseSame topicEthics in medical practiceFrench-language works237,207