MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3174530286 · doi:10.3332/ecancer.2021.1256

Facilitators and barriers perceived by health professionals in the implementation of Managing Cancer and Living Meaningfully (CALM) psychotherapy in Santiago

2021· article· en· W3174530286 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venueecancermedicalscience · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsCanadian Hospice Palliative Care AssociationUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThematic analysisFocus groupResistance (ecology)NursingMedicineWorkloadIntervention (counseling)Palliative careHealth professionalsQualitative researchCommunication skills trainingHealth carePerceptionMedical educationPsychologyCommunication skills

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Palliative care (PC) for advanced cancer is guaranteed by law in Chile, but the formal training for it is insufficient. Training models have emerged internationally that enable professionals to be better prepared for the provision of psychotherapy in PC. The objective of this study is to explore health professionals' perceptions of the 'Managing Cancer and Living Meaningfully' (CALM) psychotherapy and the perceived barriers and facilitators to its implementation, based on a theoretical training. METHODS: A qualitative study was carried out with health professionals working in oncology and/or PC and participating in a CALM training. A focus group was conducted after to explore the experience of CALM training and the perceived barriers and facilitators to its implementation. A thematic analysis of the content and an analysis of the facilitators and barriers to the implementation of mental health services were carried out. RESULTS: Twenty four professionals participated in the training, six of whom were part of the subsequent focus group. There was a consensus that the training was a positive professional experience and that it is a culturally sensitive and feasible intervention for application in Chile. The barriers identified include institutional bureaucracy as resistance to change, the excess workload of the clinical teams and the absence of spaces for more in-depth training. CONCLUSIONS: CALM is a useful and relevant framework for the training of health professionals working in oncology and PC. In Chile, there is a need for training spaces on this topic. Future research and organisational studies should evaluate professionals' beliefs about, and resistance to, adopting evidence-based psychotherapeutic interventions.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.220

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.048
GPT teacher head0.468
Teacher spread0.420 · 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