80 Family Caregiver Emotional and Communication Needs in Canadian Paediatric Emergency Departments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Paediatric emergency departments (EDs) have been identified as inherently stressful for families, making it challenging to understand and meet families’ global needs, beyond urgent medical care. There is a paucity of research describing how effectively the emotional and communication needs of family caregivers are met during ED visits. Objectives To describe the extent to which family caregivers’ emotional and communication needs were met during paediatric ED visits and relate these findings to visit and demographic characteristics. Design/Methods Electronic surveys with medical record review were deployed at ten Canadian paediatric EDs from October 2018 – March 2020. A convenience sample of families with children <18 years presenting to a paediatric ED were enrolled, for one week every three months, for one year per site. Caregivers completed one survey in the ED and a follow-up survey, up to seven days post-visit. Results This study recruited 2005 caregivers who were mostly identified as mothers (74.3%, 1462/1969); mean age was 37.8 years (SD 7.7). 71.7% (1081/1507) of caregivers felt their emotional needs were met. Staff physicians (35.6% [535/1502]), bedside nurses (24.2% [364/1502]), residents/medical students (13.8% [207/1502]) and triage nurses (12.4% [186/1502]) were identified as providing the best emotional support to caregivers. 86.4% (1293/1496) identified communication with the doctor as good/very good and 83.4% (1249/1498) with their child’s nurse. Caregiver involvement in their child’s care was reported as good/very good 85.6% (1271/1485) of the time. 81.8% (1074/1313) of caregivers felt comfortable in caring for their child at home at the time of discharge. Greater triage acuity, being the father (vs. mother), lower caregiver anxiety, respect for the child’s privacy, caregiver involvement in their child’s care, satisfactory updates, and having questions adequately addressed positively impacted caregiver emotional needs. Caregivers feeling less scared during an ED visit, lower caregiver anxiety, caregiver involvement in their child’s care, satisfactory updates, and having questions adequately addressed increased caregiver comfort in caring for their child’s illness at home. Conclusion Approximately 30% of caregivers presenting to paediatric EDs have unmet emotional needs, over 15% have unmet communication needs, and 15% felt inadequately involved in their child’s care, challenging healthcare providers to do better. Family caregiver involvement in care and good communication from ED staff are key elements in improving overall patient experience and satisfaction.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".