MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2464851703 · doi:10.1111/ajr.12313

Factors affecting rural volunteering in palliative care – an integrated review

2016· review· en· W2464851703 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Dawn Whittall, Susan Lee, Margaret O’Connor

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Journal of Rural Health · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPalliative careNursingCINAHLWorkforceThematic analysisMedicineHealth carePsychosocialEnd-of-life careRural areaQualitative researchPolitical scienceSociologyPsychological intervention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To review factors shaping volunteering in palliative care in Australian rural communities using Australian and International literature. Identify gaps in the palliative care literature and make recommendations for future research. A comprehensive literature search was conducted using Proquest, Scopus, Sage Premier, Wiley online, Ovid, Cochran, Google Scholar, CINAHL and Informit Health Collection. The literature was synthesised and presented in an integrated thematic narrative. Australian Rural communities. While Australia, Canada, the United States (US) and the United Kingdom (UK) are leaders in palliative care volunteer research, limited research specifically focuses on volunteers in rural communities with the least occurring in Australia. Several interrelated factors influence rural palliative care provision, in particular an increasingly ageing population which includes an ageing volunteer and health professional workforce. Also current and models of palliative care practice fail to recognise the innumerable variables between and within rural communities such as distance, isolation, lack of privacy, limited health care services and infrastructure, and workforce shortages. These issues impact palliative care provision and are significant for health professionals, volunteers, patients and caregivers. The three key themes of this integrated review include: (i) Geography, ageing rural populations in palliative care practice, (ii) Psychosocial impact of end-end-of life care in rural communities and (iii) Palliative care models of practice and volunteering in rural communities. The invisibility of volunteers in rural palliative care research is a concern in understanding the issues affecting the sustainability of quality palliative care provision in rural communities. Recommendations for future Australian research includes examination of the suitability of current models of palliative care practice in addressing the needs of rural communities; the recruitment, training, ongoing education and support of volunteers in rural palliative care provision to ensure equitable care for all communities in Australia regardless of location.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.869
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
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 head0.309
GPT teacher head0.527
Teacher spread0.219 · 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.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations15
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralian Journal of Rural HealthSame topicPalliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesFrench-language works237,207