Provision of comprehensive, culturally competent palliative care in the Qikiqtaaluk region of Nunavut: Health care providers' perspectives.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To explore health care providers' perceptions of the provision of palliative care in the Qikiqtaaluk (formerly known as Baffin) region of Nunavut. DESIGN: An exploratory, qualitative, cross-sectional design using in-depth, semistructured interviews. SETTING: Qikiqtaaluk region of Nunavut. PARTICIPANTS: Seven physicians and 6 registered nurses who worked in Iqaluit or other northern Inuit communities in the Qikiqtaaluk region of Nunavut. METHODS: Thirteen health care providers participated in in-person or telephone semistructured interviews, which were audiorecorded and transcribed verbatim. MAIN FINDINGS: Interviews with the participating health care providers in the Qikiqtaaluk region of Nunavut revealed 5 complex and interwoven themes that influence the provision of comprehensive, culturally competent palliative care services to Indigenous patients: respecting Inuit culture, end-of-life care planning, and the role of family; recognizing the importance of the northern community (sense of home); being aware of the limited health care resources; recognizing the critical role of medical interpreters; and improving the quality of palliative care programs and resources, as well as health care provider training in palliative care and Inuit end-of-life care. CONCLUSION: Health care providers in the Qikiqtaaluk region of Nunavut have identified several important themes that influence the provision of culturally sensitive and comprehensive palliative care, most notably the need to develop palliative care resources and programs. It is hoped that the results of this study can be used to help guide palliative care strategies including program development and educational initiatives for health care providers. These initiatives can help build community capacity within a currently underserviced population and improve end-of-life care services available to Nunavut patients and their families. Further studies are required to determine the perspectives of medical interpreters, as well as palliative care patients and their families.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".