Organizational and individual barriers and facilitators to the integration of pediatric palliative care for children: A grounded theory study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pediatric palliative care has established benefits for children with cancer and their families. Overcoming organizational and healthcare provider barriers have been demonstrated as central for the provision of palliative care in pediatric oncology. A deeper understanding is needed of the influence of these barriers and the interactions between them, specifically in primary palliative care in hospital settings. AIM: To identify the organizational and healthcare provider barriers to the provision of primary pediatric palliative care. DESIGN: This study utilized the grounded theory method. Semi-structured interviews were conducted and analyzed line by line, using NVivo software. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Forty-six pediatric oncologists, nurses, psychosocial team members, and other healthcare providers from six academic hospital centers participated in the research. RESULTS: Organizational and healthcare provider factors were identified, each of which acted as both a barrier and facilitator to the provision of pediatric palliative care. Organizational barriers included lack of resources and management. Facilitators included external resources, resource management, and a palliative care center within the hospital. Individual barriers included attitudes toward palliative care among pediatric oncologists, pediatric oncologists' personalities, and the emotional burden of providing palliative care. Facilitators include dedication and commitment, initiative, and sense of meaning. Provider facilitators for palliative care had a buffering effect on organizational barriers. CONCLUSION: Organizational and healthcare provider factors influence the quality and quantity of palliative care given to children and their families. This finding has implications on interventions structured to promote primary palliative care for children, especially in healthcare systems and situations where resources are limited.
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 | 0.006 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".