MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063655441 · doi:10.1108/13660750610683215

Moral distress in the pediatric intensive care unit: the impact on pediatric nurses

2006· article· en· W2063655441 on OpenAlex
Joy Mekechuk

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueLeadership in Health Services · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEthics and Legal Issues in Pediatric Healthcare
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMoral dilemmaDilemmaValue (mathematics)DistressBurnoutBiomedical technologyPsychologyEthical dilemmaPediatric intensive care unitFaithNursingMedicineSocial psychologyPsychotherapistPolitical scienceLawEpistemologyClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: The purpose of this paper is to explore the concept of moral distress in particular as it impacts on the pediatric intensive care nurse caught between caring for infants and children who would not otherwise be alive were it not for the advances of modern medical technology, and their personal beliefs concerning the societal value of life at any cost. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: Describes cases and real incidents to illustrate the moral distress experienced by-these nurses caught between caring for the children and at the same time interacting with the families. Such families are too often living on hope, with a profound faith in the ever advancing world of medical technology to keep loved ones alive with little thought to the consequences. FINDINGS: Suggests that the impact of moral distress on pediatric nurses, particularly as it relates to burnout, may well jeoparidize their ability to deliver effective care and is another unrecognized cost in the medical world. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Suggests that an ethical approach to care is necessary through hard to answer questions. Due to the fact that such questions are not often addressed, the author suggests consideration be given to medical ethicists to mediate and assist those caught in this dilemma. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: This paper will be of value to those concerned with how medical and life-saving technologies are outstripping our human abilities to comprehend and live with the consequences, and some of the ethical issues that arise.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.160
Threshold uncertainty score0.948

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.138
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.270 · 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