121.6: Understanding compassion fatigue, moral distress, and burnout among organ donation coordinators in Canada: a mixed-methods study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Organ and tissue donation coordinators (OTDCs) play a key role in organ donation from approaching families about donation to organizing organ retrieval and allocation. However, due to the emotionally challenging and stressful scenarios faced daily, OTDCs are commonly affected by work-related issues (e.g., burnout and compassion fatigue). The incidence of work-related issues among OTDCs can lead to increased turnover and decreased quality of deceased organ donation processes. Still, little is known about the incidence of work-related issues among OTDCs in Canada. Therefore, our aim was to explore the incidence and potential causes of work-related issues among OTDCs in Canada. Methods: Mixed-methods explanatory sequential design using a cross-sectional survey and qualitative descriptive individual interviews. We invited all (n=175) OTDCs working in Canadian Organ Donation organizations to participate in our study. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics (SPSS software) and qualitative data were analyzed using a thematic analysis approach (NVIVO). Results: Of 121 OTDCs who responded to the survey, most had seriously considered leaving their job (70%). Participants presented high scores for all three domains of burnout (emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, personal accomplishment); high levels of moral distress; high compassion satisfaction and secondary traumatic stress; and low resilience levels. Additionally, results from qualitative interviews (n=39) illuminated a series of stressors (e.g., poor support), difficult cases (e.g., pediatric), and past experiences from participants regarding work-related issues. Conclusion: This is the first study including a large heterogenic sample of OTDCs across Canada to investigate work-related issues. Our results indicate that Canadian OTDCs are highly impacted by the stressors and emotional aspects of their job. Intervention and supportive measures are currently needed to support the work-related well-being of those professionals and improve the quality of deceased organ donation in Canada.
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 | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".