MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2411032000 · doi:10.1177/082585970502100103

Educational Needs of Palliative Care Nurses in Quebec

2005· article· en· W2411032000 on OpenAlexaffabout
Use Fillion, Martine Fortier, Richard L. Goupil

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Palliative Care · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAttendancePalliative careNursingDistressNeeds assessmentWork (physics)Stress managementMedicinePsychologyMedical educationFamily medicineClinical psychologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Education appears to be a useful strategy for improving quality of care and work-related stress management. The present study assesses the educational needs of palliative care nurses working in acute care hospitals (n=88) and CLSCs (Centre Local de Services Communautaires, home-based, n=109) of the larger Quebec City area. It also describes relationships between educational needs, psychological distress, and self-efficacy. Nurses were surveyed and compared on training needs, preferred learning format, as well as barriers and factors facilitating attendance to workshops. Similar educational needs were observed in both work settings. Crisis, stress, and emotion management were rated as the most useful topics, followed by nonpharmacological ways to manage pain. Preferred educational formats were lectures and group discussions. Attending free training sessions during work hours was described as the best way to promote participation. Educational needs were positively related to psychological distress, and negatively related to perceived self-efficacy in providing good palliative care.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.172
Threshold uncertainty score0.885

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.355 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations28
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Palliative CareSame topicPalliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesFrench-language works237,207