MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2970167588 · doi:10.1891/1748-6254.13.1.46

Knowledge, Attitude, and Practice of Healthcare Professionals Regarding Family Presence During Resuscitation: An Interventional Study in a Tertiary Care Setting, Karachi, Pakistan

2019· article· en· W2970167588 on OpenAlexaff
Shaista Meghani, Rozina Karmaliani, Khairulnissa Ajani, Shireen Shehzad Bhamani, Nadeem Ullah Khan, Nasreen Lalani

Bibliographic record

VenueConnect The World of Critical Care Nursing · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFamily and Patient Care in Intensive Care Units
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTertiary careHealth careHealth professionalsTertiary levelMedicineResuscitationFamily medicineNursingPsychologyMedical educationMedical emergencyEmergency medicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Family presence during resuscitation (FPDR) has not been fully adopted by healthcare professionals (HCPs), especially physicians and nurses. However, the concept of FPDR is gradually gaining recognition around the world. There are no guidelines or policies in Pakistan to guide HCPs in their practice regarding FPDR. However, over time, patients' and families' rights have gained recognition and healthcare has progressed to become more patient–family centered. Aim: The study aims to evaluate the impact of an educational program on knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) of HCPs towards FPDR in ED, at a tertiary care setting, in Karachi, Pakistan. Methods: A quasi-experimental pretest and posttest design was used. KAP of ED nurses and physicians were assessed before (pretest), immediately after (posttest I), and at two weeks (posttest II) after the educational intervention, which includes an hour of educational training session. Results: The mean scores of knowledge and attitude of HCPs at all three points (pretest, posttest I, and posttest II) were found to be statistically significant (p < .001). There was a significant difference between pre- and posttest I, and posttest II (p < .001), but not between the two posttests. No significant difference was observed regarding practice scores. Conclusion: The study tested an educational intervention for FPDR, which was found to be effective in improving the HCPs' knowledge and in changing their attitude. Based on these results, FPDR-specific training, with structured FPDR guidelines using a multidisciplinary team approach are essential for the implementation of FPDR.

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)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.291
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.491
Teacher spread0.427 · 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.

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

Citations5
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConnect The World of Critical Care NursingSame topicFamily and Patient Care in Intensive Care UnitsFrench-language works237,207