MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2106647059 · doi:10.12968/ijpn.2006.12.4.21010

Caring for patients with terminal delirium: palliative care unit and home care nurses’ experiences

2006· article· en· W2106647059 on OpenAlexaffabout
Susan Brajtman, Kathryn Higuchi, Christine McPherson

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Palliative Nursing · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
Canadian institutionsÉlisabeth Bruyère HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeliriumPalliative careTerminal (telecommunication)NursingMedicineTerminal careUnit (ring theory)Terminal cancerIntensive care unitIntensive care medicinePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: To explore palliative care unit and home care nurses' experiences of caring for patients with terminal delirium. DESIGN: A qualitative exploratory design using individual interviews. SAMPLE: Participants included five nurses working in an interdisciplinary palliative care unit located in a large Canadian city hospital, and four nurses from a palliative home care nursing team located in the same city. RESULTS: Nurses in both sites experienced multiple challenges caring for delirious patients. Additional education on delirium and collaborative teamwork were viewed as key factors in enhancing their ability to care for and support this patient and family population. Four core themes reflected the participants' perceptions and experiences: experiencing distress; the importance of presence; valuing the team; and the need to know more. CONCLUSION: Findings suggest the need for interdisciplinary educational initiatives focused on the identification and management of terminal delirium, and targeted to the specific context in which nurses practise.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.255
Threshold uncertainty score0.745

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations50
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Palliative NursingSame topicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive DisordersFrench-language works237,207