The Demoralization Scale: A Report of its Development and Preliminary Validation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The development and elaboration of a conceptualization of existential distress in patients with advanced disease is crucial in order to optimize our clinical response within palliative medicine. Demoralization is one expression of existential distress. Its empirical study will be greatly enhanced by a self-report measure that captures its dimensions and intensity. We report here on the development and testing of the Demoralization Scale in 100 patients with cancer. Factor analysis identified five relatively distinct dimensions: loss of meaning, dysphoria, disheartenment, helplessness, and sense of failure. These factors show high internal reliability, and convergent validity with the McGill Quality of Life Scale, Patient Health Questionnaire, Beck Depression Inventory, Beck Hopelessness Scale, Hunter Opinions and Personal Expectations Scale, and the Schedule of Attitudes toward Hastened Death. Its divergent validity is demonstrated through the differentiation of a subgroup of patients with high demoralization who do not meet DSM-IV categorization for a diagnosis of major depression. Confirmatory validation is needed for the scale to be used as a measure of change in interventions designed to treat demoralization.
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 | 0.018 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".