Beyond Favourable Attitudes to End-of-Life Rights: The Experiences of Israeli Health Care Social Workers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This is a qualitative study of eighteen Israeli health care social workers' experiences at times of end-of-life decisions in light of the 2007 law that legitimises patients' rights to withhold life-sustaining treatments under certain conditions. Results convey a troublesome picture in which social workers tend to remove themselves from involvement in these decisions due to an experience of inefficiency. The study reveals two main obstacles to involvement in end-of-life decisions: (i) fears about the well-being of the dying patient, his/her family members, their colleagues and themselves; and (ii) the impossible position of social workers due to conflicting demands between (a) perception of their role and expectations of the multidisciplinary team, (b) personal views and the patient's wishes, (c) personal views and professional norms, (d) organisational principles and the new law, and (iii) the patient's rights and the procedures required to implement them. Implications for social work education and socialisation, as well as the practice of health care social workers, are 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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".