“Caring as if it were my family”: Health care aides' perspectives about expert care of the dying resident in a personal care home
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: A qualitative pilot study was conducted to identify and describe expert behaviors in care of the dying resident in a personal care home setting from the perspective of health care aides (N = 5) nominated by their peers as demonstrating excellence in end-of-life care. METHODS: Data was collected through audio-taped semi-structured interview, and transcribed verbatim using constant-comparative analysis procedures. RESULTS: The over-arching theme emerging from the data was "caring as if it were my family." Subsumed within this main theme included the sub-themes of: (1) care of the resident; (2) tending to the environment; (3) care of the family; (4) going to bat; and (5) processing loss. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: The findings from this pilot study provide preliminary empirical evidence that could inform educational programs for and performance evaluation of, health care aides providing end-of-life care in personal care home environments.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".