‘Heated political dynamics exist …’: examining the politics of palliative care in rural British Columbia, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Palliative care is delivered by a number of professional groups and informal providers across a range of settings. This arrangement works well in that it maximizes avenues for providing care, but may also bring about complicated 'politics' due to struggles over control and decision-making power. Thirty-one interviews conducted with formal and informal palliative care providers in a rural region of British Columbia, Canada, are drawn upon as a case study. Three types of politics impacting on palliative care provision are identified: inter-community, inter-site, and inter-professional. Three themes crosscut these politics: ownership, entitlement, and administration. The politics revealed by the interviews, and heretofore underexplored in the palliative literature, have implications for the delivery of palliative care. For example, the outcomes of the politics simultaneously facilitate (e.g. by promoting advocacy for local services) and serve as a barrier to (e.g. by privileging certain communities/care sites/provider) palliative care provision.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".