MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220890093 · doi:10.1186/s12913-022-07689-w

Optimizing the integration of family caregivers in the delivery of person-centered care: evaluation of an educational program for the healthcare workforce

2022· article· en· W4220890093 on OpenAlexafffund
Jasneet Parmar, Tanya L’Heureux, Sharon Anderson, Wendy Austin, Cheryl Pollard, Lisa Poole, Lesley Charles, Lyn K. Sonnenberg, Myles Leslie, Gwen McGhan, Arlene Huhn, Sandy Sereda, Cecilia Marion, Glenda Tarnowski, Jennifer Mah, Denise Melenberg, Carolyn Weir, Charlotte Pooler, Nora MacLachlan, Suzette Brémault‐Phillips, Peter George Jaminal Tian, Lori‐Ann R. Sacrey

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Health Services Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFamily and Patient Care in Intensive Care Units
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta HospitalBow Valley CollegeNorQuest CollegeUniversity of CalgaryGlenrose Rehabilitation HospitalUniversity of ReginaAlzheimer Society of CanadaUniversity of AlbertaCollege & Association of Registered Nurses of AlbertaCovenant HealthToronto Dementia Research AllianceAlberta Health Services
FundersAlberta Health Services
KeywordsWorkforceNursingHealth careLikert scaleMedicineHealth administrationFamily centered careFamily caregiversNursing researchHealth informaticsFamily medicinePsychologyPublic health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: While family caregivers provide 70-90% of care for people living in the community and assist with 10-30% of the care in congregate living, most healthcare providers do not meaningfully involve family caregivers as partners in care. Recent research recommends that the healthcare workforce receive competency-based education to identify, assess, support, and partner with family caregivers across the care trajectory. OBJECTIVE: This paper reports a mixed-methods evaluation of a person-centered competency-based education program on Caregiver-Centered Care for the healthcare workforce. METHODS: This foundational education was designed for all healthcare providers and trainees who work with family caregivers and is offered free online (caregivercare.ca). Healthcare providers from five healthcare settings (primary, acute, home, supportive living, long-term care) and trainees in medicine, nursing, and allied health were recruited via email and social media. We used the Kirkpatrick-Barr health workforce training evaluation framework to evaluate the education program, measuring various healthcare providers' learner satisfaction with the content (Level 1), pre-post changes in knowledge and confidence when working with family caregivers (Level 2), and changes in behaviors in practice (Level 3). RESULTS: Participants were primarily healthcare employees (68.9%) and trainees (21.7%) and represented 5 healthcare settings. Evaluation of the first 161 learners completing the program indicated that on a 5-point Likert scale, the majority were satisfied with the overall quality of the education (Mean(M) = 4.69; SD = .60). Paired T-tests indicated that out of a score of 50, post-education changes in knowledge and confidence to work with family caregivers was significantly higher than pre-education scores (pre M = 38.90, SD = 6.90; post M = 46.60, SD = 4.10; t(150) = - 16.75, p < .0001). Qualitative results derived from open responses echoed the quantitative findings in satisfaction with the education delivery as well as improvements in learners' knowledge and confidence. CONCLUSION: Health workforce education to provide person-centered care to all family caregivers is an innovative approach to addressing the current inconsistent system of supports for family caregivers. The education program evaluated here was effective at increasing self-reported knowledge and confidence to work with family caregivers.

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 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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.073
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.440
GPT teacher head0.545
Teacher spread0.105 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations42
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Health Services ResearchSame topicFamily and Patient Care in Intensive Care UnitsFrench-language works237,207