Nursing Interventions to Reduce Stress in Families of Critical Care Patients: An Integrative Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Having a family member admitted to an intensive care unit is a stressful experience that may lead to psychological symptoms including depression, anxiety, and posttraumatic stress disorder. OBJECTIVE: To better understand the phenomenon of stress experienced by families of intensive care unit patients and identify nursing interventions that may help reduce it. METHODS: An integrative literature review was performed to identify principal stressors for families of patients receiving care in neonatal, pediatric, and adult intensive care units and recommended nursing interventions. RESULTS: The principal stressors in the 3 types of intensive care units were change in parental role or family dynamics, appearance and behavior of the patient, the care setting, and communication with the health care staff. Nursing interventions should focus on valuing the role of family members in patient care, improving communication, and providing accurate information. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Family members of intensive care patients will benefit from nursing interventions that adequately acknowledge and address the stress they experience. CONCLUSION: Nurses play a crucial role in helping to reduce the stress experienced by family members of intensive care unit patients.
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 | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".