Caring for the invisible and forgotten: a qualitative document analysis and experience-based co-design project to improve the care of families experiencing out-of-hospital cardiac arrest
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this project were to collect and analyze clinical governance documents related to family-centred care and cardiac arrest care in Canadian EMS organizations; and to improve the family-centredness of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest care through experience-based co-design. METHODS: We conducted qualitative document analysis of Canadian EMS clinical governance documents related to family-centred and cardiac arrest care, combining elements of content and thematic analysis methods. We then used experience-based co-design to develop a family-centred out-of-hospital cardiac arrest care policy and procedure template. RESULTS: Thirty-five Canadian EMS organizations responded to our requests, representing service area coverage for 80% of the Canadian population. Twenty documents were obtained for review and six overarching themes were identified: addressing family in event of in-home death, importance of family, family member escort, provider discretion and family presence discouraged. Informed by our qualitative analysis we then co-designed a policy and procedure template was created that prioritizes patient care while promotes family-centredness. CONCLUSIONS: There were few directives to support family-centred care by Canadian EMS organizations. A family-centred out-of-hospital cardiac arrest care policy and procedure template was developed using experience-based co-design to assist EMS organizations improve the family-centredness of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest 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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.051 | 0.040 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".