MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2068781309 · doi:10.1017/s1478951506060445

Enhancing meaning in palliative care practice: A meaning-centered intervention to promote job satisfaction

2006· article· en· W2068781309 on OpenAlex

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenuePalliative & Supportive Care · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion, Spirituality, and Psychology
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityUniversité Laval
FundersCanadian Health Services Research FoundationHealth Services Research and Development
KeywordsMeaning (existential)Intervention (counseling)Palliative careJob satisfactionNursingPsychologyMedicinePsychotherapistSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: This article introduces a new meaning-centered psycho-educational group intervention, called Enhancing meaning in palliative care nursing, designed to support nurses providing palliative care. This intervention aims at increasing job satisfaction and quality of life, as well as preventing burnout in this particular population. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORKS: Its format and content are founded on the meaning-centered psychotherapy approach developed for terminally ill cancer patients (Breitbart, 2001; Greenstein & Breitbart, 2000). Frankl's existential therapeutic approach, called logotherapy, serves as the underlying theoretical framework to this intervention. DEVELOPMENT: Following the presentation of the context and the development of the intervention, its content is described. CONCLUSION: A brief description of the ongoing randomized controlled trial testing the intervention is then provided. Finally, the way in which this intervention could contribute to nurses' quality of life and suggestions for future developments are briefly discussed.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.343
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.356 · 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