MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W72373074

Telenursing in hospice palliative care.

2007· article· en· W72373074 on OpenAlexaffabout
Della Roberts, Carolyn Tayler, Diane MacCormack, Doris Barwich

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsKwantlen Polytechnic UniversitySurrey Memorial Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPalliative careGeneral partnershipNursingTriageChristian ministryMedicineCoping (psychology)Health careFamily medicineMedical emergencyBusinessPsychiatryPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the last months of life, many people with advanced illness will be living in their homes. Coping with changing symptoms, and ultimately preparing for death, becomes part of daily life. Whether the ill person is at home for days or for months, they depend on family or friends to be primary caregivers, supported by home-based services. However, after physician and home health offices close, many patients and their caregivers are left to cope alone. The authors describe an innovative partnership between B.C. NurseLine (a provincial tele-triage and health information call centre), the British Columbia Ministry of Health and Fraser Health Hospice Palliative Care program that created after-hours access to care for dying patients and their families in one of Canada's largest health authorities. The article outlines how information and communications technology enabled merging the capacity and expertise of B.C. NurseLine with the expertise of specialized community-based palliative care services to achieve outcomes of improved symptom management, decreased visits to emergency rooms and enhanced support for families who are caring for loved ones at home. For nurses caring for home-based patients, there are lessons to be learned about how to maximize technology to create systems that both improve access to care and are sustainable in the future.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.117

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0350.005

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 head0.132
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations23
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues→French-language works237,207→