MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Family satisfaction with care in the intensive care unit: Results of a multiple center study*

2002· article· en· W2115791689 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care Medicine · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFamily and Patient Care in Intensive Care Units
Canadian institutionsKingston General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIntensive care unitCenter (category theory)Intensive carePatient satisfactionFamily medicineNursingMedical emergencyIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To determine the level of satisfaction of family members with the care that they and their critically ill relative received. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Six university-affiliated intensive care units across Canada. METHODS: We administered a validated questionnaire to family members who made at least one visit to intensive care unit patients who received mechanical ventilation for >48 hrs. We obtained self-rated levels of satisfaction with 25 key aspects of care related to the overall intensive care unit experience, communication, and decision making. For family members of survivors, the questionnaire was administered while the patient was still in the hospital. For family members of nonsurvivors, the questionnaire was mailed out to the family member 3-4 wks after the patient's death. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 891 family members received questionnaires; 624 were returned (70% response rate). The majority of respondents were satisfied with overall care and with overall decision making (mean +/- sd item score, 84.3 +/- 15.7 and 75.9 +/- 26.4, respectively). Families reported the greatest satisfaction with nursing skill and competence (92.4 +/- 14.0), the compassion and respect given to the patient (91.8 +/- 15.4), and pain management (89.1 +/- 16.7). They were least satisfied with the waiting room atmosphere (65.0 +/- 30.6) and frequency of physician communication (70.7 +/- 29.0). The variables significantly associated with overall satisfaction in a regression analysis were completeness of information received, respect and compassion shown to the patient and family member, and the amount of health care received. Satisfaction varied significantly across sites. CONCLUSIONS: Most family members were highly satisfied with the care provided to them and their critically ill relative in the intensive care unit. Efforts to improve the nature of interactions and communication with families are likely to lead to improvements in satisfaction.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.356
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.143
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.270 · 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