The influence of organisational context and practitioner attitudes on implementation of the carer support needs assessment tool (CSNAT) intervention
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background The Carer Support Needs Assessment Tool (CSNAT) intervention identifies and addresses family carer support needs towards end of life.1–3A paucity of studies has investigated how to successfully implement evidence based interventions within palliative care. Aim Investigate how staff attitudes and organisational context affect implementation of the CSNAT intervention in palliative care. Methods 36 UK palliative care services participated. Staff surveys measured attitudes and context prior to, and six months after the implementation began including (i) a questionnaire assessing staff attitudes to the CSNAT; (ii) The Alberta Context Tool (ACT) assessing organisational context. Data on use of the CSNAT intervention were collected over six months; services were classified as ‘high’ or ‘low’ adopters on this basis. Relationships between service characteristics, aggregate data on staff attitudes and organisational context, and level of adoption were analysed. Results 157/462 surveys were returned at baseline and 69/462 at six months. Level of adoption depended on service type. ‘High’ adopters had a higher ratio of intervention ‘champions’ to total staff numbers and higher scores for ACT ‘informal interactions’ (e.g. more discussions with colleagues about patient care), compared to ‘low’ adopters. Both groups had similarly positive attitudes to the CSNAT intervention pre-implementation. By six months attitudes for ‘low’ adopters were significantly more negative, but remained similar or improved for ‘high’ adopters. Conclusions Ensuring successful implementation of complex interventions within palliative care requires consideration of the organisational context, service type, strategies for maintaining positive staff attitudes over time, and the use of intervention ‘champions’. References Ewing G, Brundle C, Payne S, Grande G. The Carer Support Needs Assessment Tool (CSNAT) for use in palliative and end-of-life care at home: A validation study.J Pain Symptom Manage2013;46(3):395–405 Ewing G, Grande G. Development of a Carer Support Needs Assessment Tool (CSNAT) for end-of-life care practice at home: a qualitative study.Palliat Med2013;27(3):244–256 Ewing G, Austin L, Diffin J, Grande G. The Carer Support Needs Assessment Tool: A person centred approach to carer assessment and support.Br J Community Nurs2015;20(12):580–584
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 | 0.017 | 0.077 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".