MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297965007 · doi:10.1177/10748407221124254

Critically Ill Patients: Family Experiences of Interfacility Transfers From Rural to Urban Centers and Impact on Family Relationships

2022· article· en· W4297965007 on OpenAlexaff
Margie Burns, Jill Bally, Meridith Burles, Shelley Peacock

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Family Nursing · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFamily and Patient Care in Intensive Care Units
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of Prince Edward Island
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCritically illFeelingContext (archaeology)Vulnerability (computing)Rural areaNursingAnxietySocial supportMedicinePsychologySocial psychologyPsychiatryGeographyIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A critical illness event is intensely stressful for family members and can lead to negative psychological, emotional, social and financial consequences. In geographically rural areas, critically ill patients may require an interfacility transfer to an urban centre for advanced critical care services. In this context, research suggests that these family members from rural areas experience additional burdens, yet little is known about these experiences. An interpretive phenomenological approach was used to explore lived experiences of family members from rural areas whose critically ill relative undergoes an interfacility transfer to an urban centre for advanced critical care services. Participants described feelings of vulnerability in the urban centre, the need to protect the critically ill patient and other relatives, maintaining responsibilities at home, navigating family relationships, and a loss of connection during the transfer window. These findings may better position nurses to address family members' stress and anxiety during this experience.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.149
Threshold uncertainty score0.962

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.289 · 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.

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

Citations12
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Family NursingSame topicFamily and Patient Care in Intensive Care UnitsFrench-language works237,207