MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113952308 · doi:10.1558/hscc.v12i1.3

HEALTH CARE CHAPLAINCY AND EUTHANASIA IN AUSTRALIA

2009· article· en· W2113952308 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lindsay B. Carey, Jeffrey Cohen, Bruce Rumbold

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth and Social Care Chaplaincy · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpiritual careQuarter (Canadian coin)Pastoral careNursingHealth careMedicineQualitative researchPsychologyFamily medicineSociologySpiritualityAlternative medicinePolitical scienceLawHistorySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents the findings of quantitative and qualitative research involving over 300 Australian health care chaplains concerning their involvement in patient and staff issues with regard to euthanasia. Approximately one quarter of chaplains (26.3%) indicated having been involved in patient / family euthanasia issues and one fifth of chaplains were involved in staff euthanasia issues. Forty-three (n = 43) chaplains consented to in-depth interviews about the nature of their involvement in euthanasia issues. It is noted that the important knowledge and tacit experience of those trained and practicing in pastoral care should be included when considering euthanasia issues and decisions.

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)0.000
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 score0.560
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.352 · 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.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations7
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth and Social Care ChaplaincySame topicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207