The COVID-19 pandemic and palliative care units: A cross-sectional survey of the informational needs of caregivers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Visiting restrictions placed on palliative care units due to the COVID-19 pandemic have resulted in emotional and psychological distress to patients, their caregivers and families. However, the informational needs of caregivers during pandemic visiting restrictions have never been studied. Aim: To identify the informational needs of caregivers of patients admitted to an end-of-life palliative care unit under COVID-19 visiting restrictions. Methods: Nineteen caregivers of patients admitted to a single palliative care unit while under pandemic visiting restrictions were recruited. A cross-sectional telephone survey was performed, which examined the importance of different informational needs of caregivers and how well these needs were being met. Results: Receiving information about hospital regulations/procedures, health updates about the patient, social support for the patient and how to communicate with the patient in light of visitor restrictions were 'very important' to caregivers. In contrast, caregivers were 'neutral' towards receiving information about accessing psychosocial/emotional support for the caregiver and religious/spiritual support for the patient. Qualitative data summaries provided a richer understanding of these quantitative rankings. Conclusion: These findings will assist healthcare professionals in providing optimal informational support to caregivers during visitor restrictions in order to improve the growing psychological impact on this population.
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 | 0.001 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".