Impact of palliative care (PC) consultation on quality of end-of-life (EOL) care in advanced cancer patients receiving care at a tertiary cancer center (TCC).
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
129 Background: Early integration of PC with oncological care has been shown to improve outcomes in patients with advanced cancer, including quality of life and mood. It has also been suggested to have a positive impact on quality of EOL care. The purpose of our study was to examine how occurrence and timing of PC consultation are associated with quality of EOL care in advanced cancer patients receiving care at a Canadian TCC. Methods: In this retrospective study, patients who died between April 1, 2013 and March 31, 2014, had advanced cancer while receiving care at our TCC, and lived in the catchment area of our urban comprehensive integrated PC program were eligible. Date of death, demographics, and cancer type were obtained from the cancer registry. Date of diagnosis of advanced cancer was determined from electronic medical records. Occurrence and date of PC consultation were identified from the PC database. Data on quality of EOL care indicators were retrieved from the cancer registry, including, in the last 30 days of life: emergency room visits, hospital admission, hospitalization > 14 days, ICU admission, death in hospital, and chemotherapy use. Results: Of 1414 eligible patients, 1101 (77.9%) received PC consultation in hospital, outpatient clinic, or community. Patients who received PC consultation were younger than those who did not receive PC consultation (age 68.8 vs. 71.0, p = 0.01), and differed in the frequency of cancer types (p < 0.001), but not sex, marital status, or income. 679 patients (48.0%) had at least 1 indicator of quality of EOL care. Patients who did and did not receive PC consultation did not differ in the frequency of any indicators of quality of EOL care. There were also no differences in frequency of quality of EOL care indicators between patients who received their first PC consultation > 3 months vs. ≤3 months or > 6 months vs. ≤6 months before death. Conclusions: Among advanced cancer patients receiving care at our TCC, occurrence and timing of PC consultation did not affect quality of EOL care. Methodological and healthcare system differences may explain the discrepancy between our results and those of other investigators. Further research is needed.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».