A Website Supporting Sensitive Religious and Cultural Advance Care Planning (ACPTalk): Formative and Summative Evaluation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Advance care planning (ACP) promotes conversations about future health care needs, enacted if a person is incapable of making decisions at end-of-life that may be communicated through written documentation such as advance care directives. To meet the needs of multicultural and multifaith populations in Australia, an advance care planning website, ACPTalk, was funded to support health professionals in conducting conversations within diverse religious and cultural populations. ACPTalk aimed to provide religion-specific advance care planning content and complement existing resources. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this paper was to utilize the context, input, process, and product (CIPP) framework to conduct a formative and summative evaluation of ACPTalk. METHODS: The CIPP framework was used, which revolves around 4 aspects of evaluation: context, input, process, and product. Context: health professionals' solutions for the website were determined through thematic analysis of exploratory key stakeholder interviews. Included religions were determined through an environmental scan, Australian population statistics, and documentary analysis of project steering committee meeting minutes. Input: Project implementation and challenges were examined through documentary analysis of project protocols and meeting minutes. Process: To ensure religion-specific content was accurate and appropriate, a website prototype was built with content review and functionality testing by representatives from religious and cultural organizations and other interested health care organizations who completed a Web-based survey. Product: Website analytics were used to report utilization, and stakeholder perceptions were captured through interviews and a website survey. RESULTS: Context: A total of 16 key stakeholder health professional (7 general practitioners, 2 primary health nurses, and 7 palliative care nurses) interviews were analyzed. Website solutions included religious and cultural information, communication ideas, legal information, downloadable content, and Web-based accessibility. Christian and non-Christian faiths were to be included in the religion-specific content. Input: Difficulties gaining consensus on religion-specific content were overcome by further state and national religious organizations providing feedback. Process: A total of 37 content reviewers included representatives of religious and cultural organizations (n=29), health care (n=5), and community organizations (n=3). The majority strongly agree or agree that the content used appropriate language and tone (92%, 34/37), would support health professionals (89%, 33/37), and was accurate (83%, 24/29). Product: Resource usage within the first 9 months was 12,957 page views in 4260 sessions; majority were (83.45%, 3555/4260) from Australia. A total of 107 Australian-based users completed the website survey; most felt information was accurate (77.6%, 83/107), easy to understand (82.2%, 88/107), useful (86.0%, 92/107), and appropriate (86.0%, 92/107). A total of 20 nurses (general practice n=10, palliative care n=8, and both disciplines n=2) participated in stakeholder interviews. Qualitative findings indicated overall positivity in relation to accessibility, functionality, usefulness, design, and increased knowledge of advance care planning. Recommended improvements included shortened content, a comparable website for patients and families, and multilingual translations. CONCLUSIONS: The CIPP framework was effectively applied to evaluate the development and end product of an advance care planning website.Although overall findings were positive, further advance care planning website development should consider the recommendations derived from this study.
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 | 0.105 | 0.138 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 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".