When the paediatric intensive care unit becomes home: A hermeneutic‐phenomenological study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Family-centred care is the dominant model for providing nursing care in paediatrics. Unit layout has been shown to impact nurses' ability to provide family-centred care. Little is known about the meanings and experiences of paediatric intensive care unit nurses concerning the care they provide to families within their unique physical setting. AIM: This study examined paediatric intensive care unit nurses' lived experience of caring for families following a major hospital transformation project, which included the construction of a new unit and quality improvement changes. STUDY DESIGN: A hermeneutic-phenomenological design was selected to study a paediatric intensive care unit in a large Canadian paediatric teaching hospital. METHODS: Data were collected over a 6-month period through individual interviews, photographs, participant observation, and document review. The sample consisted of 15 paediatric intensive care unit nurses who experienced the unit both pre- and post-transformation. Data were analysed in an ongoing fashion using the method described by Benner to identify common and divergent meanings. RESULTS: Despite pride in offering a family-friendly environment, nurses' practice prejudiced a family focus in favour of patient-centred care. Nurses in this study negotiated physical and practice spaces with families by interpreting that nurses do not belong in the home-like patient room and exhibiting gatekeeping comportments. CONCLUSION: Although similar nurse comportments have been identified in prior works, no previous studies have identified these as forming a pattern of negotiating spaces with families. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: This study provides insights into the lived experience of paediatric intensive care unit nurses in relation to family care, which can stimulate reflections at an organizational level about creating environments where nurses and families can both feel at home.
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 | 0.012 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 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".