MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6989080037

Advance Care Planning between Registered Nurses and their Acute Care Patients

2022· dissertation· en· W6989080037 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUVic’s Research and Learning Repository (University of Victoria) · 2022
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAcute careAdvance care planningContext (archaeology)AccreditationObservational studyAcute hospitalCritical care nursingEnd-of-life care
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canadians are living longer with multiple complex illnesses. In turn, older adults are often in need of complex medical attention in crisis situations in acute care hospital settings. Although acute care settings are equipped with a growing variety of life saving technologies, hospitals are still the setting in which most people die. Yet, almost half of the Canadians who have been admitted to acute care centres with chronic life-limiting illnesses have not had advance care planning (ACP) conversations with their substitute decision-maker (SDM) about the personal values that bring quality to their lives. In fact, only 8% of the general Canadian population are ACP ready. Consequently, many SDMs are unprepared to make end of life (EOL) treatment decisions for their loved ones. One way to promote patient-centred care and ease the burden of in-the-moment EOL treatment decisions made by SDMs, is for nurses to engage their patients in ACP. However, very few registered nurses regularly engage their patients in ACP. The purpose of this research is to better understand the organizational factors influencing nurses’ decisions related to ACP in their hospital-based work. This ethnographic study was conducted on three acute care wards in two hospital sites located in Northern Ontario. Data collection methods included observational fieldwork, semi-structured interviews with administrators and registered nurses (n=23), and the collection of documents pertinent to the study purpose (i.e., accreditation reports, practice guidelines, etc.). Findings reveal that the work of nurses in hospital settings is embedded within a context that prioritizes patient flow, and efficiency. Consequently, hospitals often function at overcapacity, and nurses have extremely heavy workloads caring for complex patients with diagnoses that do not match the medical specialty of the units. Although participants state that they value ACP, they maintain that nurses have very little capacity to engage patients in these conversations in their practice. Findings support that expectations for hospital nurses to fully engage in ACP with their patients may be unrealistic given the context within which they work. Alternative models for considering ACP in acute care could be explored to ensure that patients with life-limiting conditions receive care that is best matched to their needs, values, and wishes.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
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 score0.463
Threshold uncertainty score0.921

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.320 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUVic’s Research and Learning Repository (University of Victoria)Same topicPalliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesFrench-language works237,207