Pain Management for the Child with Cancer in End-of-Life Care: APON Position Paper
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although there have been major advances in the treatment of childhood cancer with an overall survival rate of more than 70%, cancer continues to be the leading cause of death in children resulting from disease. In 1998, 2,500 children in the United States died of cancer-related causes. Each year cancer kills more children than asthma, diabetes, cystic fibrosis, congenital anomalies, and acquired immunodeficiency syndrome combined. The Association of Pediatric Oncology Nurses (APON) is the leading professional organization for nurses caring for children and adolescents with cancer and their families. The highest standards of nursing practice are achieved through education, research, certification, advocacy, and affiliation. It is the position of APON that pain in the child dying of cancer can be effectively managed. This can be accomplished by making the prevention and alleviation of pain a primary goal, partnering with the patient and parents, and aggressively using appropriate pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic interventions. The pediatric oncology nurse has an essential role in the child's pain management at the end of life through nursing assessment, identifying expected outcomes, and performing and evaluating interventions.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".