MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

341.4: Uncovering Work-Related Problems Among Organ Donation Coordinators: The BRiC Research Program

2022· article· en· W4296445401 on OpenAlexaffabout
Vanessa Silva e Silva, Laura Hornby, Ken Lotherington, Amina Silva, Andrea Rochon, Aimee Sarti, Sonny Dhanani

Bibliographic record

VenueTransplantation · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrgan Donation and Transplantation
Canadian institutionsSt. Lawrence CollegeChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioCanadian Blood ServicesBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBurnoutOrgan donationWorkforceCompassion fatigueWork (physics)MedicinePsychological interventionPsychologyMedical educationNursingTransplantationEngineeringPolitical scienceSurgeryClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Organ Donation Coordinators (OTDCs) play a fundamental role in deceased organ donation processes. However, due to the emotionally challenging and stressful scenarios faced daily, they are commonly affected by work-related issues (e.g., burnout and compassion fatigue), which can lead to increased turnover, reduced quality of healthcare services and negative impact in Organ Donation Organizations performance. Therefore, Canadian Blood Services has partnered with CHEO Research Institute and the organ and tissue donation community to create a research program to study Burnout and Resilience in OTDCs (The BRiC Research Program). The main objectives of the BRiC Research Program are to investigate the incidence and potential causes of work-related issues among OTDCs and to propose innovative ways of dealing with these issues to support teams and decrease turnover of experienced and exceptional OTDCs. Method: The BRiC Research Program was built using a participatory approach that provides the best evidence possible to help address the specific needs of knowledge users (Organ Donation Organizations and OTDCs). The BRiC started with the development of a core three-phased study: phase 1, we published a scoping review to investigate the available literature on burnout and compassion fatigue among OTDCs; in phase 2, we are using a mixed-methods approach to explore work-related issues among Canadian OTDCs; and in phase 3, informed by phases 1 and 2, we will develop, implement and measurethe impact of interventions designed to address work-related issues among OTDCs. In addition to the core three-phased study, we also completedfour related projects: (1) a working meeting with representatives from Canadian Organ Donation Organizations; (2) a reflective narrative paper co-authored by Canadian OTDCs discussing their views and experiences with work-related issues; (3) a qualitative study that investigated experiences of OTDCs about compassion fatigue, burnout and resilience; and (4) a qualitative study that explored the perceptions of OTDCs related to their experiences in a Relationship Centred Care workshop. Results: An overview of the BRiC Research Program can be found in Figure 1. The outputs of this research program since its launching in 2019 include: a scoping review protocol and a final manuscript publication; three publications regarding the additional projects (reflective narrative, and results from both qualitative studies); 2 poster presentations, 4 invited speaker presentations; and 9 grant applications, 2 granted. Conclusion: The findings from this research program will inform clinical practice through knowledge dissemination activities. As this study has been designed in collaboration with national knowledge disseminators (Canadian Blood Services) and provincial end users (Organ Donation Organizations) it will yield meaningful results that can be readily integrated into strategies to decrease OTDC turnover. We would like to thank Canadian Blood Services and the Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario for their support funding this work. We thank all Canadian Organ Donation Organizations and the Organ and Tissue Donation Coordinators for their support and participation in this work.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.088
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.090
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.088
Threshold uncertainty score0.466

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0880.090
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0070.006
Science and technology studies0.0110.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0060.011
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.004

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransplantationSame topicOrgan Donation and TransplantationFrench-language works237,207