At the Epicentre of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Canada: Experiences and Recommendations of Family Care Partners of an Older Person Living in a Long-Term Care Home
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The roles of family care partners of older persons living in long-term care homes (LTCH) were severely disrupted during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. Our aim was to describe their experiences and to solicit their recommendations for supportive actions. We conducted a critical ethnography with 24 care partners who cared or had cared for an older person living in an LTCH in Québec during the COVID-19 pandemic. We collected data during interviews and used Spradley's method to analyse them. Care partners experienced a forced separation from the older persons they cared for, which resulted in significant distress. Care, including post-mortem care, was considered inadequate and sometimes even inhumane. Communication was inconsistent, and this variability was also noted in visitation rules. Care partners perceived LTCHs as a neglected community. Supportive actions were recommended. The results illustrated the essential contribution of care partners, and the supportive actions they recommended must be a catalyst for change toward more humane care in LTCH settings.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".