MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2920208862 · doi:10.1080/07481187.2018.1526829

The experiences of physicians, nurses, and social workers providing end-of-life care in a pediatric acute-care hospital

2019· article· en· W2920208862 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueDeath Studies · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFamily and Patient Care in Intensive Care Units
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNursingAcute careCoping (psychology)MedicineQualitative researchSocial workPromotion (chess)End-of-life careHealth carePsychologyFamily medicinePalliative careClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This qualitative study explored the experiences of social workers, nurses, and physicians providing end-of-life care to children in a pediatric acute-care hospital setting. Findings demonstrated that participants experienced both professional and personal impacts of their work and employed various coping strategies under each of these domains. The acute-care setting was found to create unique challenges in providing end-of-life care. Implications for policy and practice include promotion of both individual and institutional-level coping strategies and supports that meet the various needs of staff. Implications for future research include a nuanced examination of differences in experiences among nurses, social workers, and physicians.

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.

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)0.000
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 score0.393
Threshold uncertainty score0.396

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.332 · 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