MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4310240509 · doi:10.1007/s00415-022-11497-x

Conceptualization, use, and outcomes associated with compassion in the care of people with multiple sclerosis: a scoping review

2022· review· en· W4310240509 on OpenAlexaff
Robert Simpson, Stephanie Posa, Tania Bruno, Sharon Simpson, Marina B. Wasilewski, Lawrence R. Robinson, Sarah Munce, Mark Bayley, Anthony Feinstein

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurology · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreUniversity Health NetworkSunnybrook Health Science CentreToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCINAHLConceptualizationPsycINFOCompassionQualitative researchPsychologyChecklistMindfulnessMEDLINEMedicineClinical psychologyNursingPsychological interventionPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Compassion is widely regarded as an important component of high-quality healthcare. However, its conceptualization, use, and associated outcomes in the care of people with multiple sclerosis (PwMS) have not been synthesized. The aim of this review is to scope the peer reviewed academic literature on the conceptualization, use, and outcomes associated with compassion in the care of PwMS. METHODS: Studies were eligible for inclusion if reporting primary research data from quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-methods studies on the conceptualization, use, and outcomes associated with compassion in the care of PwMS. Relevant studies were identified through searching five electronic databases (CINAHL, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and PsycINFO) in January 2022. We followed the guidance outlined in the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) manual for evidence synthesis, and also referred to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses extension for Scoping Reviews Checklist (PRISMA-ScR). Simple descriptive methods were used to chart quantitative findings, and a descriptive approach with basic content analysis was employed to describe qualitative findings. RESULTS: Fifteen studies were included (participant n = 1722): eight quantitative, six mixed-methods, one exclusively qualitative. Synthesized qualitative data revealed that PwMS conceptualize compassion as involving self-kindness, agency, and acceptance. PwMS report using self-compassion in response to unpleasant sensations and experiences. Quantitative findings suggest that compassion may mediate benefit finding, reduced distress, and improved quality of life (QoL) in PwMS, that those with the condition may become more compassionate through time, and that self-compassion specifically can be increased through training in mindfulness. In this context, greater self-compassion in PwMS correlates with less depression and fatigue, better resilience and QoL. Among studies, self-compassion was the most common outcome measure for PwMS. CONCLUSIONS: A nascent literature exists on the conceptualization, use, and outcomes associated with compassion in the care of PwMS. Further research is required to better understand what compassion means to PwMS and those caring for them. However, self-compassion can be cultivated among PwMS and may be helpful for managing unpleasant somatic symptoms and in benefit finding. Impact on other health outcomes is less clear. The use of compassion by health care providers in the care of PwMS is unstudied.

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)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.317
Threshold uncertainty score0.514

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.200
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.188 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeurologySame topicMultiple Sclerosis Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207