MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2117279724 · doi:10.5737/1181912x1213438

Enhancing palliative care through Watson’s carative factors

2002· article· en· W2117279724 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Patricia McKay, Dale Rajacich, Janet Rosenbaum

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Oncology Nursing Journal · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWatsonPalliative carePsychosocialNursingMedicineTerminally illNeeds assessmentPsychologyPsychiatrySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Palliative care is aimed at alleviating the suffering of patients with terminal illnesses. As more patients make the decision to die at home, community palliative care has become an alternative to hospitalization. The literature was examined in relation to the needs of terminally ill patients in the community and their families to determine their priority needs. Patients were found to have physical, psychosocial, and spiritual needs, while families had needs in relation to the physical care of their loved ones, as well as information and psychosocial needs. The use of Watson's theory of human caring, and in particular her carative factors, was found to be an appropriate nursing model to direct palliative care nurses in meeting the needs of both patients and their families.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.481
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.162
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 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

Citations11
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Oncology Nursing JournalSame topicPalliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesFrench-language works237,207