MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309913000 · doi:10.1186/s12904-022-01097-x

Just and inclusive end-of-life decision-making for long-term care home residents with dementia: a qualitative study protocol

2022· article· en· W4309913000 on OpenAlexafffund
Nisha Sutherland, Oona St. Amant, Sherry L. Dupuis, Pia Kontos, Elaine Wiersma, Mary Brennan

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Palliative Care · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of TorontoToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of WaterlooLakehead University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsDementiaEnd-of-life carePalliative careLong-term careMedicineTerm (time)GerontologyPain medicineProtocol (science)Qualitative researchPsychologyPsychiatryNursingAlternative medicineAnesthesiologyDiseaseSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Many people living with dementia eventually require care services and spend the remainder of their lives in long-term care (LTC) homes. Yet, many residents with dementia do not receive coordinated, quality palliative care. The stigma associated with dementia leads to an assumption that people living in the advanced stages of dementia are unable to express their end-of-life needs. As a result, people with dementia have fewer choices and limited access to palliative care. The purpose of this paper is to describe the protocol for a qualitative study that explores end-of-life decision-making processes for LTC home residents with dementia. METHODS/DESIGN: This study is informed by two theoretical concepts. First, it draws on a relational model of citizenship. The model recognizes the pre-reflective dimensions of agency as fundamental to being human (irrespective of cognitive impairment) and thereby necessitates that we cultivate an environment that supports these dimensions. This study also draws from Smith's critical feminist lens to foreground the influence of gender relations in decision-making processes towards palliative care goals for people with dementia and reveal the discursive mediums of power that legitimize and sanction social relations. This study employs a critical ethnographic methodology. Through data collection strategies of interview, observation, and document review, this study examines decision-making for LTC home residents with dementia and their paid (LTC home workers) and unpaid (family members) care partners. DISCUSSION: This research will expose the embedded structures and organizational factors that shape relationships and interactions in decision-making. This study may reveal new ways to promote equitable decision-making towards palliative care goals for LTC home residents with dementia and their care partners and help to improve their access to palliative care.

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)0.067
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.037
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.352

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0670.037
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0110.007
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0060.006
Research integrity0.0050.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.004

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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.510
Teacher spread0.417 · 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
GenreProtocol

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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Palliative CareSame topicGeriatric Care and Nursing HomesFrench-language works237,207