MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2790714250 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2017-019701

What are healthcare providers’ understandings and experiences of compassion? The healthcare compassion model: a grounded theory study of healthcare providers in Canada

2018· article· en· W2790714250 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Shane Sinclair, Thomas F. Hack, Shelley Raffin‐Bouchal, Susan McClement, Kelli Stajduhar, Pavneet Singh, Neil A. Hagen, Aynharan Sinnarajah, Harvey Max Chochinov

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMindfulness and Compassion Interventions
Canadian institutionsAlberta Health ServicesUniversity of ManitobaResearch Institute in Oncology and HematologyCancerCare ManitobaSt. Boniface HospitalUniversity of VictoriaUniversity of Calgary
FundersM.S.I. FoundationUniversity of Calgary
KeywordsCompassionMedicineHealth careGrounded theoryNursingQualitative researchEmpathyPsychiatrySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Healthcare providers are considered the primary conduit of compassion in healthcare. Although most healthcare providers desire to provide compassion, and patients and families expect to receive it, an evidence-based understanding of the construct and its associated dimensions from the perspective of healthcare providers is needed. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate healthcare providers' perspectives and experiences of compassion in order to generate an empirically derived, clinically informed model. DESIGN: Data were collected via focus groups with frontline healthcare providers and interviews with peer-nominated exemplary compassionate healthcare providers. Data were independently and collectively analysed by the research team in accordance with Straussian grounded theory. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: 57 healthcare providers were recruited from urban and rural palliative care services spanning hospice, home care, hospital-based consult teams, and a dedicated inpatient unit within Alberta, Canada. RESULTS: Five categories and 13 associated themes were identified, illustrated in the Healthcare Provider Compassion Model depicting the dimensions of compassion and their relationship to one another. Compassion was conceptualised as-a virtuous and intentional response to know a person, to discern their needs and ameliorate their suffering through relational understanding and action. CONCLUSIONS: An empirical foundation of healthcare providers' perspectives on providing compassionate care was generated. While the dimensions of the Healthcare Provider Compassion Model were congruent with the previously developed Patient Model, further insight into compassion is now evident. The Healthcare Provider Compassion Model provides a model to guide clinical practice and research focused on developing interventions, measures and resources to improve it.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.114
Threshold uncertainty score0.567

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0230.009
Scholarly communication0.0090.003
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.166
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations139
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ OpenSame topicMindfulness and Compassion InterventionsFrench-language works237,207