Symptom Burden in Chronically Ill Homebound Individuals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To document the degree of symptom burden in an urban homebound population. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. SETTING: The Mount Sinai Visiting Doctors (MSVD) program. PARTICIPANTS: All individuals newly enrolled in the MSVD. MEASUREMENTS: Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS), which consists of 10 visual analogue scales scored from 0 to 10; symptoms include pain, tiredness, nausea, depression, anxiety, drowsiness, appetite, well-being, shortness of breath, and other. RESULTS: ESAS scores were completed for 318 participants. Most participants were aged 80 and older (68%) and female (75%); 36% were white, 22% black, and 32% Hispanic. Forty-three percent had Medicaid, and 32% lived alone. Ninety-one percent required assistance with one or more activities of daily living, 45% had a Karnofsky Performance Scale score between 0 and 40 (unable to care for self), and 43% reported severe burden on one or more symptoms. The most commonly reported symptoms were loss of appetite, lack of well-being, tiredness, and pain; the symptoms with the highest scores were depression, pain, appetite, and shortness of breath. Participants were more likely to have severe symptom burden if they self-reported their ESAS, had chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or diabetes mellitus with end organ damage, or had a Charlson Comorbidity Index greater than 3 and less likely to have severe burden if they had dementia. CONCLUSION: In chronically ill homebound adults, symptom burden is a serious problem that needs to be addressed alongside primary and specialty care needs.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".