MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404807467 · doi:10.1370/afm.22.s1.6868

Unleashing the Potential of Primary Care Nurses in Chronic Pain Management: A Delphi Study on Priority Activities

2024· article· en· W4404807467 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Andréanne Bernier, Marie-Ève Poitras, Marie-Dominique Poirier, Anaïs Lacasse

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Annals of Family Medicine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth and Wellbeing Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrimary careDelphi methodDelphiPain managementChronic painMedicineNursingPrimary (astronomy)Family medicinePhysical therapyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<h3>Context:</h3> Chronic pain stands as a leading cause of disability globally, with patients often reporting inadequate access to primary care. Relevant primary care nursing activities for CP management remain poorly defined, limiting the full utilization of nurses9 competencies and expertise in chronic disease management. <h3>Objective:</h3> To identify and prioritize nursing activities for chronic pain management in primary care by adopting nurse and patient perspectives. <h3>Study Design, Setting, and Participants:</h3> We conducted a three-round Delphi study with nurses from primary care practices and patients living with pain for more than three months across Québec, Canada. This study was conducted in partnership with two patient partners living with chronic pain. <h3>Instrument and Outcome Measures:</h3> The research utilized web-based questionnaires within REDCap<sup>®</sup>. In the initial round, panellists identified nursing activities for chronic pain management they deemed most important through open-ended questions. In the two subsequent rounds, nursing activities were (items) were assessed for their importance using a 9-point Likert scale. Activities achieving agreement (≥75% of participants rating the importance at 7, 8, or 9, i.e., priority activities) composed the list from rounds 2 to 3 and the final list. Mean scores (and standard deviations) were also calculated for each activity to rank their importance. <h3>Results:</h3> 48 nurses and 122 patients participated (n=170) throughout the process. From 47 nursing activities derived from 1167 suggestions in the first round, 41 were prioritized by ≥75% of participants by the final round. These activities were grouped into four domains: global assessment (n = 15, 36.6% of all activities), care management (n = 10, 24.4%), health promotion (n = 7, 17.1%), and interprofessional collaboration (n = 9, 22.0%). The top three nursing activities based on the final mean score were: Assessing dimensions of pain experience, Screening signs and symptoms of mood disorders, and Establish a therapeutic alliance with empathic approach. <h3>Conclusions:</h3> Nurses and patients identified a shared set of nursing activities for primary chronic pain care that aligns with usual care already provided by nurses to patients living with chronic diseases. Our results will guide primary care practices and nurses’ activities to improve chronic pain management.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.540
Threshold uncertainty score0.417

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.246
GPT teacher head0.529
Teacher spread0.283 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Annals of Family MedicineSame topicHealth and Wellbeing ResearchFrench-language works237,207