MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2768029346 · doi:10.1177/1049909117740122

Development, Implementation, and Evaluation of a Curriculum to Prepare Volunteer Navigators to Support Older Persons Living With Serious Illness

2017· article· en· W2768029346 on OpenAlexaff
Wendy Duggleby, Barbara Pesut, Laura Cottrell, Lynnelle Friesen, Kelli M. Sullivan, Grace Warner

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine® · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusOkanagan University CollegeUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumMedicineMedical educationNursingQuality of life (healthcare)GerontologyPsychologyPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this article is to report the development, implementation, and evaluation of a curriculum designed to prepare volunteer navigators to support community-dwelling older persons with serious chronic illness. The role of the volunteer navigator was to facilitate independence and quality of life through building social connections, improving access to resources, and fostering engagement. A curriculum was constructed from evidence-based competencies, piloted and revised, and then implemented in 7 subsequent workshops. Workshop participants were 51 volunteers and health-care providers recruited through local hospice societies and health regions. Curriculum was evaluated through satisfaction and self-efficacy questionnaires completed at workshop conclusion. Postworkshop evaluation indicated a high degree of satisfaction with the training. One workshop cohort of 7 participants was followed for 1 year to provide longitudinal evaluation data. Participants followed longitudinally reported improved self-efficacy over 12 months and some challenges with role transition. Future improvements will include further structured learning opportunities offered by telephone postworkshop, focusing on advocacy, communication, and conflict management. Overall, volunteers were satisfied with the curriculum and reported good self-perceived efficacy in their new role as navigators.

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)0.001
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 score0.073
Threshold uncertainty score0.483

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.387 · 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

Citations32
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine®Same topicPalliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesFrench-language works237,207