6.10-P30Researching palliative care in humanitarian crises: Jordan case study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This presentation features the research activities involved in one of five case studies from a larger study: “Aid when there is nothing left to offer: a study of ethics & palliative care during international humanitarian action.” We aim to better understand ethical and practical experiences, challenges, and possibilities of humanitarian organisations integrating palliative care into public health emergency responses. We aim to inform education and policy evidence on the provision of palliative care with the goal of equipping humanitarian responses with a more explicit lens and skill set for managing patients who are suffering from life-threatening conditions during public health emergencies. This qualitative study in Jordan included interviews with refugees living in a refugee camp, refugees living in urban settings, Jordanian citizens, and national and international service providers. Results from this case study and lessons learned will be presented to inform others interested in completing similar studies, service providers and programme planners supporting refugees in similar settings. Key findings include: participant perspectives of palliative care, the realities of living with terminal illness or injury, facing end of life with fractured family ties and personal priorities. Other findings include the perspective of service providers and those in need of or receiving services. Lessons learned include the selection, hiring and training of local team members. Supporting team members during the research process. The importance of debriefing interviewers and others collecting, reviewing and analysing participant information. Translating the understanding of the results for dissemination. Main messages include the importance of culture in all research roles in this type of research; considerations of how to promote the integrity of the research and the importance of reflection and discussion to promote participant voices in research with refugees. Acknowledgement: ELHRA Research for Health in Humanitarian Crises (R2HC) Programme for funding support.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.027 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".