Area-Based Compassionate Communities: A systematic integrative review of existing initiatives worldwide
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Area-Based Compassionate Communities are community public health interventions which focus on the role of the community in palliative care provision. They apply a set of actions based on the Ottawa Charter for Health Promotion which aims to increase people's control over their health. AIM: To review and compare Area-Based Compassionate Communities with respect to their contextual characteristics, development processes and evaluations. DESIGN: A systematic integrative review with narrative synthesis. Registered in Prospero: CRD42020173406. DATA SOURCES: Five databases (Pubmed, Web of Science, PsycInfo, Embase and Scopus) were consulted, consisting of publications from 1999 onwards. This was supplemented with grey literature and author-provided documentation. RESULTS: Twenty articles were drawn from the peer reviewed search, three from grey literature and two from author-provided documentation. Notwithstanding the substantial variation in what is reported, all Area-Based Compassionate Community initiatives focus on multiple action areas of the Ottawa Charter for Health Promotion. Variability in their contextual and developmental characteristics is high. Only a minority of initiatives have been evaluated and although conclusions are generally positive, what is evaluated often does not match their aims. Attaining support from policy makers can help in obtaining funding early in the project. Strengthening people's social networks was a recurring community engagement strategy. CONCLUSIONS: While the concept of Area-Based Compassionate Communities is gaining momentum as a new paradigm for the creation of palliative care capacity across society, only a handful of initiatives have been described. The lack of formal evaluations of their envisaged health benefits indicates a pressing need for rigorous research about ongoing and future initiatives.
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 | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".