Attitudes of Terminally Ill Older Adults toward Complementary and Alternative Medicine Therapies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: The aim of this study was to characterize the attitudes of older adults on an inpatient palliative care unit toward complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) therapies. METHODS: A consecutive sample of 33 inpatients (61 to 98 years old) completed a questionnaire that examined their attitudes toward CAM to determine the acceptability of these therapies. Corresponding questionnaires were gathered from 10 substitute decision makers (SDMs). Preferences for specific CAM modalities were identified. Correlational analyses were performed between interest in CAM therapies and demographic variables and clinical status, including physical and psychological distress. RESULTS: A total of 27 patients (82 percent) were interested in trying CAM therapies. The greatest interest was shown in music therapy (61 percent) and massage therapy (58 percent). All of the SDMs were interested in having CAM therapies available for their loved ones to try. DISCUSSION: Attitudes toward CAM therapies of terminally ill older inpatients and their SDMs are highly favourable. CAM treatments merit closer evaluation as a means of enhancing end-of-life care.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".