MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2885004816 · doi:10.1177/0030222818788238

The Impact of Unusual End-of-Life Phenomena on Hospice Palliative Care Volunteers and Their Perceived Needs for Training to Respond to Them

2018· article· en· W2885004816 on OpenAlexaff
Stephen Claxton‐Oldfield, Megan Gallant, Jane Claxton-Oldfield

Bibliographic record

VenueOMEGA - Journal of Death and Dying · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion, Spirituality, and Psychology
Canadian institutionsTantramar Wetlands CentreMount Allison University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVisionSpiritualityPalliative careVolunteerMedicinePsychologyNursingFamily medicineAlternative medicineSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Thirty-nine hospice palliative care volunteers completed a survey examining (a) their beliefs about end-of-life phenomena (EOLP), (b) the impact of EOLP on their lives, and (c) their perceived needs for training to respond to them. Forty-nine percent of the volunteers either had personally witnessed an EOLP in their volunteer work and/or had a patient or patient's family member report an EOLP to them. More than half of the volunteers strongly agreed or agreed that EOLP have influenced their religious beliefs and their spirituality in a positive way (53% and 59%, respectively). Eighty-nine percent of the volunteers indicated that they had never received any training about EOLP, and nearly all of the volunteers were interested in learning more about EOLP. After completing the survey, 59% of the volunteers shared stories about EOLP they had either personally witnessed or been told about. The most frequently reported experiences involved deathbed visions. The implications of these findings are discussed.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.240
Threshold uncertainty score0.331

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 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

Citations24
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOMEGA - Journal of Death and DyingSame topicReligion, Spirituality, and PsychologyFrench-language works237,207