Impact of death and dying on the personal lives and practices of palliative and hospice care professionals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Working within the landscape of death and dying, professionals in palliative and hospice care provide insight into the nature of mortality that may be of benefit to individuals facing the end of life. Much less is known about how these professionals incorporate these experiences into their personal lives and clinical practices. Methods This ethnographic inquiry used semi-structured interviews and participant observation to elicit an in-depth understanding of the impact of death and dying on the personal lives of national key leaders (n = 6) and frontline clinicians (n = 24) involved in end-of-life care in Canada. Analysis of findings occurred in the field through constant comparative method and member checking, with more formal levels of analysis occurring after the data-collection phase. Results Eleven specific themes, organized under three overarching categories (past, present and future), were discovered. Early life experiences with death were a common and prominent feature, serving as a major motivator in participants' career path of end-of-life care. Clinical exposure to death and dying taught participants to live in the present, cultivate a spiritual life, reflect on their own mortality and reflect deeply on the continuity of life. Interpretation Participants reported that their work provided a unique opportunity for them to discover meaning in life through the lessons of their patients, and an opportunity to incorporate these teachings in their own lives. Although Western society has been described as a "death-denying" culture, the participants felt that their frequent exposure to death and dying was largely positive, fostering meaning in the present and curiosity about the continuity of life.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".