Undergraduate Medical Education in Pain Medicine, End-of-Life Care, and Palliative Care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pain is the most common reason patients seek medical care. While pain may be a symptom of an underlying disease or injury, pain can also become a persistent symptom of an autonomous neurophysiological process constituting a unique neurobiological disorder. It has been demonstrated that all forms of pain, including acute, chronic, and that associated with terminal illness, are often poorly managed with consequent needless suffering, functional impairment and disability. The American Academy of Pain Medicine, in its position statement on Chronic Pain and Quality Care at the End of Life, and the American Pain Society, in a similar statement, have affirmed that effective pain and symptom management is an ethical obligation of all healthcare providers and organizations. One of the main impediments to skillful end-of- life care is the lack of quality undergraduate education in pain medicine, end-of-life care, and palliative care. The Liaison Committee on Medical Education (LCME), the national accrediting authority for medical education programs leading to the M.D. degree in U.S. and Canadian medical schools, recently mandated education and clinical experience in end-of-life care in its standards for accreditation. This was an important step; however, of equal importance is education in the broader scope of pain medicine for medical professionals. While pain control is a significant component of end-of-life care, such care represents only a small fraction of the scope of knowledge and skills of pain medicine in which all medical students must be educated in order for the public to obtain skillful care for such problems as acute and chronic pain. Curriculum changes are necessary to ensure that future health care professionals are competent to provide expert pain diagnosis and treatment. The American Academy of Pain Medicine encourages its members to contribute to the education of future healthcare professionals in pain medicine, end-of-life care, and palliative 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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".