Understanding the work-related challenges of organ and tissue donation coordinators during the COVID-19 pandemic: a mixed-method study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to explore the perceptions of donation coordinators in Canada and understand how the COVID-19 pandemic impacted their work activities. DESIGN: A sequential mixed-method design incorporating a cross-sectional survey investigating demographic data, substance use and abuse and perceived stress related to the pandemic and semistructured qualitative interviews to further investigate those. SETTING: Organ donation organisations across Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Canadian organ and tissue donation coordinators working within deceased donation programmes. Participants were recruited using a purposive sampling technique for the survey and qualitative interviews. Recruitment and data collection took place between January 2022 and March 2023. ANALYSIS: The data were analysed using descriptive statistics for the quantitative findings and content analysis for the qualitative data. RESULTS: Of the 175 available coordinators, 120 participated in the survey, and 39 participated in the qualitative interviews. The great majority were female (n=98; 81.7%), registered nurses (n=117; 97.5%) and on average 42 years old (SD=9.64). The survey result for perceived stress showed that, on average, coordinators did not experience high stress levels during the pandemic. We also identified an increase in the consumption of substances to manage workplace stress near the pandemic's beginning. The qualitative interviews yielded two main themes (Personal Life Changes and Workplace Adjustments) in which coordinators reported their views on challenges with uncertainties, effects on their personal lives, redeployment, stressors and among others. CONCLUSION: Our study's results provide a comprehensive understanding of the perceptions and experiences of coordinators in Canada during the COVID-19 pandemic. Using a combination of methods, we identified various ways coordinators were affected by the pandemic in their personal and professional lives. These findings highlight the need to support the development of adaptive strategies and promote resilience during crises.
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 | 0.023 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".