Advantages and Challenges in Using Telehealth for Home-Based Palliative Care: Protocol for a Systematic Mixed Studies Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Given the increasing number of people in need of palliative care services and the current health care professional workforce strain, providing equitable, quality palliative care has become a challenge. Telehealth could be an innovative approach to palliative care delivery, enabling patients to spend more time or even remain at home, if they wish, throughout the illness trajectory. However, no previous systematic mixed studies reviews have synthesized evidence on patients' experiences of the advantages and challenges of telehealth for home-based palliative care. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this systematic mixed studies review is to critically appraise and synthesize findings from studies that investigated patients' use of telehealth in home-based palliative care with a focus on the advantages and challenges experienced by the patients. METHODS: This article describes the protocol for a systematic mixed studies review with a convergent design. The reporting will be guided by the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement. A systematic search was performed in eight databases for studies published from January 2010 to June 2020. The search will be updated in 2021. Pairs of authors will independently assess eligibility, extract data, and assess methodological quality. The data will then be analyzed using thematic synthesis. RESULTS: We describe the rationale and design of a systematic mixed studies review. The database searches were performed on June 25, 2020. Assessment of eligibility and further steps have not yet been performed. Results are anticipated by August 2021. CONCLUSIONS: Following the ethos of patient-centered palliative care, this systematic mixed studies review could lead to recommendations for practice and policy, enabling the development and implementation of telehealth applications and services that align with patients' preferences and needs at home. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/22626.
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 | 0.141 | 0.128 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.018 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.014 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.049 | 0.010 |
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".