MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403778972 · doi:10.1186/s12904-024-01575-4

Family caregivers’ administration of medications at the end-of-life in China: a qualitative study

2024· article· en· W4403778972 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Fei Yang, Pusheng Wang, Yong Tang, Min Kyung Song, Jun Jing, Gui-Jun Lu, Bee Wee

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Palliative Care · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, University of TorontoUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsPain medicineAdministration (probate law)Qualitative researchMedicinePalliative careChinaFamily caregiversEnd-of-life careFamily medicinePsychologyGerontologyNursingPsychiatryAnesthesiologyPolitical scienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Effective medication management is crucial for ensuring timely pain and symptom control at the end of life. Dying in pain is a major concern for patients, yet some find less effective pain control at home. Family caregivers (FCGs) play a vital role in managing pain and symptom control for dying patients. However, the experience of administering medications at home for terminal-stage patients has not been widely recognized or understood. Our study aimed to explore the experiences of FCGs in administering medications to adult dying patients. METHODS: We conducted a directed content analysis of data from 73 semi-structured interviews with FCGs across 19 Chinese provinces from 2021 to 2023. FCGs were recruited through the Voluntary Cooperative Network Research. We asked, "Could you recall the end-of-life care process for the patients?" We aligned the themes with the five issues identified by Wilson et al. (2018): administration, organizational skills, empowerment, relationships, and support. RESULTS: FCGs in China exhibit concerns about over-engagement and empowerment in medication administration, concealing medication information from the patient, and medication accessibility. FCGs faced significant challenges in accurately identifying and addressing pain and symptoms, determining appropriate dosages, accessing effective medications, and managing the emotional stress associated with potential medication errors. Financial burden, medication regulatory restrictions, geographical inequality, and travel restrictions during COVID impeded patients and FCGs from accessing medication. A culturally specific finding is the use of alternative medicine at the end of life. CONCLUSION: Our findings build upon Wilson et al.'s framework and extend their insights on empowerment, highlighting the need for policies to support home-based palliative care professionals in training FCGs for effective medication administration.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.106
Threshold uncertainty score0.211

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0110.005
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.155
GPT teacher head0.467
Teacher spread0.312 · 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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Palliative CareSame topicPalliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesFrench-language works237,207