Participatory Research in Pediatric Palliative Care: Benefits and Challenges
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Participatory research is an approach wherein all parties concerned play an active role throughout the research process, from initial design to the interpretation and dissemination of results. This article reports on two participatory research projects evaluating a new in-home respite program for children requiring pediatric palliative care and their families. Some of the realities, benefits, and challenges resulting from a participatory approach to research in pediatric palliative care are described. The outcomes of these two studies highlight the conclusion that organizations, professionals, volunteers, and family members accompanying the dying benefit from a participatory research method that actively engages their involvement. This approach offers participants the opportunity to voice concerns as well as supports a sense of empowerment. From the researcher's point of view, a participatory process can serve to increase both the social relevancy and impact of the research.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.586 | 0.476 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.066 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.020 | 0.033 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.027 |
| Research integrity | 0.015 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".