MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2224558986 · doi:10.1161/str.45.suppl_1.wp273

Abstract W P273: Health Care Professionals’ Perspectives on Implementing Family Caregiver Education and Support Programs into the Ontario Stroke System

2014· article· en· W2224558986 on OpenAlexaffabout
Victrine Tseung, Susan Jaglal, Nancy M. Salbach, Jill I. Cameron

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNursingHealth careFamily caregiversRehabilitationMedical educationPhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Family caregivers play a key role in the care of stroke survivors post-discharge. Without a standard of practice for supporting caregivers, many experience negative health outcomes. Literature supports establishing system-level infrastructure to provide education and support to family caregivers. However, the implementation of such programs has yet to be actualized. Objective: This study examined factors that influence the implementation of caregiver programs into the Ontario Stroke System from the perspectives of healthcare professionals Methods: Health care professionals providing stroke care in acute, rehabilitation and community care settings were invited to participate in the study by their Regional Education Coordinators. Health care professionals who were interested in participating in the study contacted the first author to set up the interview. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with participants. Interviews were audiotaped, professionally transcribed and reviewed for accuracy. Transcripts were coded, data was analyzed using a constant comparison approach and themes were identified. Results: A total of nineteen health care professionals participated in this study (7 acute, 5 rehab, 6 community, 1 private). Interviews lasted between 28 and 74 minutes. Data analysis identified five themes: 1) It is important for key stakeholders to understand the value of caregiver education and support programs; 2) Caregiver education and support requires dedicated resources; 3) Delineate ownership and responsibility for program implementation; 4) Provide training to health care professionals regarding caregiver needs and program materials to obtain buy-in and facilitate implementation; and 5) Establish a clear identity for the program and promote awareness of the program to potential implementers and users. Conclusions: This is the first study to identify factors that influence the implementation of family caregiver education and support programs from the perspectives of health care professionals involved in providing stroke care. Addressing these factors will enable the health care system to establish such programs, ensuring family caregivers receive the support they need.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.215
Threshold uncertainty score0.433

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0190.007
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStroke→Same topicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery→French-language works237,207→