MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399360253 · doi:10.1080/08854726.2024.2357042

Chaplain interventions and outcomes in outpatient settings: a scoping review

2024· review· en· W4399360253 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Health Care Chaplaincy · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion, Spirituality, and Psychology
Canadian institutionsSt Joseph's Health Care
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionContext (archaeology)Pastoral careMedicineNursingPalliative carePsychologyFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As chaplaincy is increasingly practiced in outpatient settings, further understanding is needed of what it entails and is accomplishing within this unique context. This scoping review summarizes 42 articles that describe the types of spiritual care interventions and programs offered by chaplains in outpatient settings, and their outcomes. Findings support that chaplaincy is practiced in outpatient settings, especially in palliative care, oncology, and primary care. Interventions are delivered by chaplains as the sole interventionist, and by interdisciplinary teams with chaplain participants. Results show that outpatient chaplain interventions are feasible and acceptable, with positive psychological and spiritual outcomes. More studies with consistent outcome measurements, and structured chaplain interventions are needed to draw further conclusions about the effectiveness of outpatient chaplain interventions.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.596
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.129
GPT teacher head0.526
Teacher spread0.398 · 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