MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309626178 · doi:10.1016/j.xkme.2022.100571

Transportation Burden Associated With Hemodialysis in Canada: A Qualitative Study of Stakeholders

2022· article· en· W4309626178 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueKidney Medicine · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDialysis and Renal Disease Management
Canadian institutionsAlberta Hospital EdmontonUniversity of Alberta HospitalToronto General HospitalUniversity of CalgarySt. Joseph's HospitalOttawa HospitalUniversity of ManitobaSeven Oaks General HospitalAlberta Health ServicesGrand River Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsStakeholderFeelingHemodialysisAnxietyPopulationMedicineQualitative researchQuality of life (healthcare)Public relationsFamily medicineBusinessPsychologyNursingEnvironmental healthSociologyPolitical sciencePsychiatrySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rationale & Objective: For patients requiring in-center hemodialysis, suboptimal transportation arrangements are commonly cited as a source of ongoing stress and anxiety and have been associated with a reduced quality of life and increased mortality risk. Transportation-related problems are especially pronounced in Canada given its size, low population density, and long, often snowy winters. We aimed to identify and better understand transportation options for hemodialysis patients in Canada and to describe stakeholder experiences. Study Design: We used a qualitative descriptive research design to explore stakeholder experiences and perspectives of transportation to and from dialysis facilities. Setting & Participants: We recruited participants from a large urban hemodialysis program in Western Canada and included 11 participants from a project group, 45 participants from an open forum, and a survey of 8 social workers. Data collection occurred at a series of project group meetings and an open forum (n=45). In addition, we asked 8 renal social workers based in major cities across Canada to comment on the provision of transport for patients in their area via email or telephone consult. Analytical Approach: We used conventional content analysis to explore stakeholder experiences. Results: Traveling to and from dialysis facilities remains a source of stress and anxiety for many patients and their families. Patients described several factors contributing to these feelings including: the challenges of physically getting to the treatment center, particularly in adverse weather conditions; being a burden on family and friends; difficulties accessing the treatment facility; issues with public transport; and financial worries related to high costs. Limitations: Findings may not be relevant in low- and middle-income countries and those with a warmer climate. Conclusions: Without a concerted and collaborative approach to address the barriers identified here, it is likely that travel to and from in-center hemodialysis will continue to adversely affect patients' quality of life.

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.

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)0.000
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 score0.094
Threshold uncertainty score0.775

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.244 · 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