Palliative care of First Nations people: a qualitative study of bereaved family members.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To understand cross-cultural hospital-based end-of-life care from the perspective of bereaved First Nations family members. DESIGN: Phenomenologic approach using qualitative in-depth interviews. SETTING: A rural town in northern Ontario with a catchment of 23 000 Ojibway and Cree aboriginal patients. PARTICIPANTS: Ten recently bereaved aboriginal family members. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted, audiotaped, and transcribed. Data were analyzed using crystallization and immersion techniques. Triangulation and member-checking methods were used to ensure trustworthiness. MAIN FINDINGS: First Nations family members described palliative care as a community and extended family experience. They expressed the need for rooms and services that reflect this, including space to accommodate a larger number of visitors than is usual in Western society. Informants described the importance of communication strategies that involve respectful directness. They acknowledged that all hospital employees had roles in the care of their loved ones. Participants generally described their relatives' relationships with nurses and the care the nurses provided as positive experiences. CONCLUSION: Cross-cultural care at the time of death is always challenging. Service delivery and communication strategies must meet cultural and family needs. Respect, communication, appropriate environments, and caregiving were important to participants for culturally appropriate palliative care.
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 | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".