Inter‐facility transfers for advanced critical care services: Impacts on rural families
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: The aim of this article is to provide an integrative review of rural family members' experiences of a relative's inter-facility transfer to an urban tertiary care centre for advanced critical care services. BACKGROUND: Although there is an increasing awareness of the negative consequences of a relative's critical illness for family members, there has been limited research conducted on the impacts of this experience for families of patients in rural settings who require an inter-facility transfer for advanced services. SEARCH STRATEGY: The search strategy for this review was framed by the study purpose, research question, and a conceptual structure of key constructs. Databases and reference lists were electronically and manually searched. INCLUSION AND EXCLUSION CRITERIA: Articles were included if they were research articles, available in English, and focused on family members' experiences of inter-facility transfer during critical illness. Articles focusing on critical care transfers within a single urban setting, elective transfers undertaken for patient or family preference, transfers not associated with critical illness, and systematic or scoping reviews were excluded. CONCLUSION: Stress and anxiety are central to the rural family members' experience of this phenomenon. These constructs are influenced by modifiable factors, including the actions of health care providers, the financial burden associated with the transfer, the family members' physical proximity to the patient, and their access to information and support networks. Further research is required to explore potential short- and long-term consequences of this experience and the experience of family members who are left behind and to develop and test interventions to support families. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: This review highlights the concern that health care providers frequently misunderstand the needs of family members who are experiencing this phenomenon. Through a better understanding of this phenomenon, health care providers will be better positioned to effectively support these individuals during this unique experience.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".