Understanding Bereaved Family Members’ Dissatisfaction with End-of-Life Care in Nursing Homes
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With increasing numbers of older adults identifying a nursing home (NH) as their final place of care, it is important to assess the quality of dying in this setting and understand factors that impact family members' dissatisfaction with end-of-life care. A retrospective bereaved family member survey (N = 208) was conducted in 21 NHs located in urban areas of central Canada. Bereaved family members who were dissatisfied with care identified significantly more concerns in all domains assessed and were more likely to have problems with: (a) receiving confusing information from nursing staff about the resident's care, including medical treatments; (b) receiving inadequate information from nursing staff; and (c) feeling that end-of-life care was different than they had expected. Since the quality of communication between nurses, residents, and family members is the main factor that determines families' dissatisfaction with care, strategies and interventions aimed at reducing unmet information needs will be vital to improving end-of-life care in NHs.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it