MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2954520993 · doi:10.1177/0269216319857630

Family members’ experiences of assisted dying: A systematic literature review with thematic synthesis

2019· review· en· W2954520993 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Claudia Gamondi, Tanja Fusi‐Schmidhauser, Anna Oriani, Sheila Payne, Nancy Preston

Bibliographic record

VenuePalliative Medicine · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFamily and Patient Care in Intensive Care Units
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJapan Agency for Medical Research and Development
KeywordsCINAHLPsycINFOThematic analysisGriefContext (archaeology)MedicineLegislationInclusion (mineral)Systematic reviewFamily medicineMEDLINEQualitative researchPalliative careAssisted suicideNursingPsychologyPsychiatryPsychological interventionSocial psychologySociologyLawPolitical scienceSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Families’ experiences of assisted dying are under-investigated and families are rarely considered in clinical guidelines concerning assisted dying. Aim: To systematically review family experiences of assisted dying. Design: A systematic literature review using thematic synthesis. Data sources: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, AMED (Allied and Complementary Medicine) and PsycINFO databases (January 1992 to February 2019). Studies investigating families’ experiences on the practice of legalised assisted dying were included. We excluded studies prior to legalisation within the jurisdiction, secondary data analysis and opinion papers. Results: Nineteen articles met the inclusion criteria. Publications were derived from four countries: The Netherlands, United States (Oregon, Washington and Vermont), Canada and Switzerland. Dutch studies predominately investigated family involvement in euthanasia, while Swiss and American studies only reported on assisted suicide. Eleven studies had a qualitative design, using predominately in-depth interviews; seven were retrospective surveys. Five analytical themes represented families’ experiences in assisted dying: (1) context of the decision, (2) grounding the decision, (3) cognitive and emotional work, (4) experiencing the final farewell and (5) grief and bereavement. The results showed that families can be very involved in supporting patients seeking assisted dying, where open communication is maintained. Family involvement appeared to be influenced by the type of legislation in their country and the families’ perception of the social acceptability of assisted dying. Conclusion: Our data confirm that families across all jurisdictions are involved in assisted suicide decision and enactment. Family needs are under-researched, and clinical guidelines should incorporate recommendations about how to consider family needs and how to provide them with evidence-based tailored interventions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.039
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.098
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.207

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0390.098
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.004
Bibliometrics0.0310.027
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.258
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations75
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePalliative MedicineSame topicFamily and Patient Care in Intensive Care UnitsFrench-language works237,207