MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387609157 · doi:10.1089/jpm.2023.0034

Palliative Care in Survivors of Critical Illness: A Qualitative Study of Post-Intensive Care Unit Program Clinicians

2023· article· en· W4387609157 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tammy L. Eaton, Taylor Lincoln, Anna Lewis, Brian C. Davis, Carla M. Sevin, Thomas S. Valley, Heidi Donovan, Jennifer B. Seaman, Theodore J. Iwashyna, Sheila Alexander, Leslie P. Scheunemann

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Palliative Medicine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAgency for Healthcare Research and QualityNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteUniversity of Pittsburgh
KeywordsPalliative careMedicinePsychological interventionNursingSpecialtyAdvance care planningIntensive care unitQualitative researchCurative careHealth careFamily medicineAmbulatory careIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Survivors of critical illness experience high rates of serious health-related suffering. The delivery of palliative care may assist in decreasing this burden for survivors and their families. Objectives: To understand beliefs, attitudes, and experiences of post-intensive care unit (ICU) program clinicians regarding palliative care and explore barriers and facilitators to incorporating palliative care into critical illness survivorship care. Design: Qualitative inquiry using semistructured interviews and framework analysis. Results were mapped using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Setting/Subjects: We interviewed 29 international members (United States, United Kingdom, Canada) of the Critical and Acute Illness Recovery Organization post-ICU clinic collaborative. Results: All interprofessional clinicians described components of palliative care as essential to post-ICU clinic practice, including symptom management, patient/family support, facilitation of goal-concordant care, expectation management and anticipatory guidance, spiritual support, and discussion of future health care wishes and advance care planning. Facilitators promoting palliative care strategies were clinician level, including first-hand experience, perceived value, and a positive attitude regarding palliative care. Clinician-level barriers were reciprocals and included insufficient palliative care knowledge, lack of self-efficacy, and a perceived need to protect ICU survivors from interventions the clinician felt may adversely affect recovery or change the care trajectory. System-level barriers included time constraints, cost, and lack of specialty palliative care services. Conclusion: Palliative care may be an essential element of post-ICU clinic care. Implementation efforts focused on tailoring strategies to improve post-ICU program clinicians' palliative care knowledge and self-efficacy could be a key to enhanced care delivery for survivors of critical illness.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.240
GPT teacher head0.554
Teacher spread0.314 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations9
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Palliative MedicineSame topicPalliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesFrench-language works237,207