MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2619850541 · doi:10.1097/ncm.0000000000000225

Supporting the Support System

2017· article· en· W2619850541 on OpenAlexaff
Jane Harkey, Jared Young, Jolynne “Jo” Carter, Michael Demoratz

Bibliographic record

VenueProfessional Case Management · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFamily and Patient Care in Intensive Care Units
Canadian institutionsNational Capital Commission
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE: The benefits of having a support system, such as social relationships with close friends and family, have been well documented for patients with serious health issues. As scientific evidence has shown, individuals who have the lowest level of involvement in social relationships face a greater mortality risk. Support systems, however, are not infallible. Relationship stress can have a negative impact on people-patient and caregiver alike-behaviorally, psychosocially, and physiologically. The purpose of this article is to encourage case managers who take a patient-centered approach to also consider the existence and extent of the support system, as well as any stresses or tensions that are observable within the support system. Although the case manager is ethically obliged to advocate for the individual receiving case management services, that advocacy can be extended to the support system for the good of all. PRIMARY PRACTICE SETTINGS: This discussion applies to numerous case management practices and work settings including (but not limited to) hospital-based case management, home health, geriatrics, catastrophic case management, mental health, palliative care, and end of life/hospice. FINDING/CONCLUSIONS: As part of the assessment phase of the case management process, case managers determine the extent of the patient's support system or social support network such as family and close friends. Although their advocacy is primarily for the patient receiving case management services, case managers also become aware of the needs of the support system members as they face their loved one's serious illness, severe injury, geriatric care demands, or end of life. Case managers can use their communication skills, especially motivational interviewing, with patients and their support systems to identify stresses and issues that can impact the pursuit of health goals. In addition, case managers ensure that individuals and their support systems are kept informed such as about the health condition, stage of disease, plan of care, treatment options, and care transition plan. IMPLICATIONS FOR CASE MANAGEMENT: Professional case managers expand their role as advocates, serving primarily the patients ("clients") who receive case management services and also members of the support system. By becoming more aware and sensitive to the needs of the support system, case managers help reduce stress on the support system, which can contribute to positive outcomes for patients ("clients").

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.673
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0090.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.114
GPT teacher head0.469
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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations8
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProfessional Case ManagementSame topicFamily and Patient Care in Intensive Care UnitsFrench-language works237,207