MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2337893460 · doi:10.1177/1471301216645214

Caring in the wake of the rising tide: Moral distress in residential nursing care of people living with dementia

2016· article· en· W2337893460 on OpenAlex
Em M. Pijl, Olu Awosoga, Shannon Spenceley, Brad Hagen, Barry Hall, Janet Lapins

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueDementia · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEthics in medical practice
Canadian institutionsLethbridge CollegeUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaDistressNursingMedicineNursing carePsychologyClinical psychologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective Moral distress is increasingly being recognized as a concern for health care professionals. The purpose of this study was to explore the nature and prevalence of moral distress among nursing staff who care for people living with dementia. Methods This study was focused on nursing staff caring for people with dementia in long-term care and assisted living sites. The Moral Distress in Dementia Care Survey instrument was distributed to 23 sites and nursing staff rated the frequency and severity of situations that were identified as potentially causing moral distress. Results Moral distress is prevalent in the nursing staff who provide dementia care. Nursing staff reported experiencing moral distress at least daily or weekly. Both frequency and severity of moral distress increased with proximity to (amount of time spent at) the bedside. Moral distress had negative psychological and physiological effects on nursing staff, and affected intention to quit.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.369 · 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