MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402307501 · doi:10.1186/s40900-024-00623-w

Motivations of family advisors in engaging in research to improve a palliative approach to care for persons living with dementia: an interpretive descriptive study

2024· article· en· W4402307501 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Stephanie Pedrotti Lucchese, Marie‐Lee Yous, Julia Kruizinga, Shirin Vellani, Vanessa Maradiaga Rivas, Bianca Tétrault, Pam Holliday, Carmel Geoghegan, Danielle Just, Tamara Sussman, Rebecca Ganann, Sharon Kaasalainen

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Involvement and Engagement · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMental Health and Patient Involvement
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityToronto Rehabilitation InstituteMcMaster UniversitySt. Lawrence College
FundersZonMwAlzheimer's SocietyCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchEU Joint Programme – Neurodegenerative Disease Research
KeywordsPalliative careDementiaDescriptive researchNursingPsychologyGerontologyMedicineMedical educationSociologyDiseaseSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A Strategic Guiding Council (SGC) was created within a Family Carer Decisions Support study, to engage family carers of persons with advanced dementia as advisors to inform the design and implementation of the study. The SGC consists of an international group of family advisors from Canada, the Republic of Ireland, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and the Czech Republic. There are limited studies that have explored the integration of Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) in dementia research, end-of-life care and long-term care. Therefore, this study explores PPI engagement in health research with family carers to understand further their interest in being involved in the SCG within the FCDS intervention which is focused on supporting caregivers to make decisions about end-of-life care for residents with advanced dementia. This study utilized an interpretive descriptive design and explored the motivations of ten family advisors from Canada, the Republic of Ireland, the United Kingdom, and the Netherlands in being part of the SGC. Semi-structured interviews were conducted by phone or videoconferencing and were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using thematic analysis. Three themes generated from the findings of the study were (1) engaging in reciprocal learning; (2) using lived experience to support other family carers; and (3) creating a collective momentum for advocacy and change. Family carers motivations to being part of the SCG was driven by their intent to help carers navigate the health system and to create a psychosocial support system for other carers experiencing end-of-life with their loved ones. Being part of the SCG provided a benefit to family carers which provided a venue for them to contribute meaningful information from their experience, learn from other health professionals, research and other advisors and an avenue for advocacy work to improve access to end-of-life care supports through education. To our knowledge, this is the first study that explores the motivations of an international group of family advisors’ engagement in health research to promote integration of a palliative approach to dementia care in long-term care homes. This study further contributes to the literature from an international perspective the importance of PPI in research. Further research is warranted that explores PPI in research to improve access to end-of-life supports. Patient and public involvement (PPI) in research has been growing worldwide and ensures that research conducted is relevant to the needs of patients. Within the Family Carer Decisions Support study, we created a Strategic Guiding Council (SGC) to engage family carers of persons with advanced dementia as advisors to improve access to a palliative approach to care. The SGC includes family advisors from Canada, the Republic of Ireland, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Italy and the Czech Republic. The goal of the strategy was to engage with family advisors in research activities to improve access to a palliative approach and quality of care provided to people with dementia receiving end-of-life care. Including patients and family in research is extremely important, therefore our aim in this study was to explore family advisors’ motivations to engaging in the SGC. Family advisors reported encountering challenges with navigating the health system with end-of-life care and they chose to participate in the SGC to support other carers who are experiencing a similar situation. Being part of the SGC also provided the family advisors with an avenue to advocate on the importance of improving access to end-of-lifesupports and the opportunity to learn from other advisors, health professionals and researchers.

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 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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.168
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.564
GPT teacher head0.539
Teacher spread0.025 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Involvement and EngagementSame topicMental Health and Patient InvolvementFrench-language works237,207