MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3033308820 · doi:10.1097/njh.0000000000000665

Recommendations to Leverage the Palliative Nursing Role During COVID-19 and Future Public Health Crises

2020· article· en· W3033308820 on OpenAlexaff
William E. Rosa, Tamryn F. Gray, Kimberly Chow, Patricia M. Davidson, J. Nicholas Dionne‐Odom, Viola Karanja, Judy Khanyola, Julius D. N. Kpoeh, Joseph Lusaka, Samuel T. Matula, Polly Mazanec, Patricia Moreland, Shila Pandey, Amisha Parekh de Campos, Salimah H. Meghani

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hospice and Palliative Nursing · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsSt Joseph's Health Centre
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsPalliative careNursingAnticipation (artificial intelligence)WorkforceCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PandemicLeverage (statistics)Health carePublic healthMedicineValue (mathematics)PsychologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the daily number of confirmed COVID-19 cases and associated deaths rising exponentially, social fabrics on a global scale are being worn by panic, uncertainty, fear, and other consequences of the health care crisis. Comprising more than half of the global health care workforce and the highest proportion of direct patient care time than any other health professional, nurses are at the forefront of this crisis. Throughout the evolving COVID-19 pandemic, palliative nurses will increasingly exercise their expertise in symptom management, ethics, communication, and end-of-life care, among other crucial skills. The literature addressing the palliative care response to COVID-19 has surged, and yet, there is a critical gap regarding the unique contributions of palliative nurses and their essential role in mitigating the sequelae of this crisis. Thus, the primary aim herein is to provide recommendations for palliative nurses and other health care stakeholders to ensure their optimal value is realized and to promote their well-being and resilience during COVID-19 and, by extension, in anticipation of future public health crises.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.048
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.096

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.048
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.011
Open science0.0040.009
Research integrity0.0150.015
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0290.009

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 head0.242
GPT teacher head0.466
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations71
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Hospice and Palliative NursingSame topicPalliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesFrench-language works237,207