MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2411247421 · doi:10.1177/082585970702300102

Participatory Research in Pediatric Palliative Care: Benefits and Challenges

2007· article· en· W2411247421 on OpenAlexaff
Suzanne Mongeau, Manon Champagne, Stephen Liben

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Palliative Care · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Children's HospitalMinistère de l’Emploi et de la Solidarité Sociale (Québec)Université du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRespite careParticipatory action researchPalliative careEmpowermentCitizen journalismNursingPerspective (graphical)SociologyMedicinePublic relationsPsychologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 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)0.001
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 score0.192
Threshold uncertainty score0.790

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.336
GPT teacher head0.461
Teacher spread0.125 · 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

Citations19
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Palliative CareSame topicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207