MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2062003142 · doi:10.1177/104990910402100406

The use of music in facilitating emotional expression in the terminally ill

2004· article· en· W2062003142 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine® · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMusic Therapy and Health
Canadian institutionsBaycrest Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFeelingGriefExpression (computer science)ReminiscenceTerminally illSet (abstract data type)Music therapyPalliative carePsychotherapistPsychologyIsolation (microbiology)Relaxation (psychology)SadnessEmotional expressionMedicineNursingClinical psychologySocial psychologyBioinformatics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The expression and discussion of feelings of loss and grief can be very difficult for terminally ill patients. Expressing their emotions can help these patients experience a more relaxed and comfortable state. This paper discusses the role of music therapy in palliative care and the function music plays in accessing emotion. It also describes techniques used in assisting clients to express their thoughts and feelings. Case examples of three in-patient palliative care clients at Baycrest Centre for Geriatric Care are presented. The goals set for these patients were to decrease depressive symptoms and social isolation, increase communication and self-expression, stimulate reminiscence and life review, and enhance relaxation. The clients were all successful in reaching their individual goals.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.684
Threshold uncertainty score0.192

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.087
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.289 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it