<i>‘Mum, I think we might ring the ambulance, okay?’</i> A qualitative exploration of bereaved family members’ experiences of emergency ambulance care at the end of life
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In the context of a sudden or unexpected event, people with a life-limiting illness and their family caregivers may be dependent on emergency ambulance services. AIM: To explore bereaved family members' experiences of emergency ambulance care at the end of life. DESIGN: A qualitative study using reflexive thematic analysis of data collected from semi-structured phone interviews. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: A purposive sample of 38 family caregivers identified from a database of deaths in Aotearoa, New Zealand. RESULTS: Emergency ambulance personnel assist, inform and reassure patients and family caregivers managing distressing symptoms, falls, infections, unexpected events and death itself. Family members and patients are aware of the pressure on emergency services and sometimes hesitate to call an ambulance. Associating ambulances with unwanted transport to hospital is also a source of reluctance. CONCLUSIONS: The generalist palliative care provided by emergency ambulance personnel is a vital service for patients in the last year of life, and their caregivers. This must be acknowledged in palliative care policy and supported with training, specialist consultation and adequate resources.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".