MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100779521 · doi:10.1017/s1478951507000454

Experiences of breathlessness: A systematic review of the qualitative literature

2007· review· en· W2100779521 on OpenAlex
Marjolein Gysels, Claudia Bausewein, Irene J Higginson

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePalliative & Supportive Care · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychosocialQualitative researchMeaning (existential)Grading (engineering)Quality of life (healthcare)MedicinePerspective (graphical)Systematic reviewPsychologyMEDLINEPsychiatryPsychotherapistNursingSociologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Breathlessness is one of the core symptoms in many advanced conditions. The subjective nature of the symptom has been acknowledged in many definitions, emphasizing that it can only be fully perceived and interpreted by the patients themselves. AIM: To review and assess the evidence on the psychosocial nature or experience of breathlessness. METHODS: Relevant literature was identified through electronic and hand searches. Studies with qualitative enquiry or mixed method designs were included. The methodological quality of studies was assessed with a standard grading scale. RESULTS: Twenty-two studies were identified, 12 from the United Kingdom, 4 from the United States, 3 from Canada, 1 from Sweden, 1 from Iceland, and 1 from Finland. The nature of the studies determined the themes in which the studies were subsumed. Studies on COPD (19) outnumbered "all other conditions" (3), one of which had COPD and cancer patients and so these were analyzed separately. Within the COPD category most studies (17) considered the experience of breathlessness from the perspective of the patient, 1 study from the informal carer, and 1 from the professional carer. Most of the papers sought to understand the meaning of the symptom in the patient's daily life. The other papers demarcated separate areas of the experience of acute exacerbations and the patient's view on care. The studies explored the subjective component of breathlessness, as part of human experience and social life. The papers showed the influence of the meaning the symptom has for those affected on their ability to cope and on their management. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: Although the work in this area is still dominated by research on COPD, the totality of the evidence now shows breathlessness as an intractable symptom in other advanced conditions. Practice recommendations focused on the holistic approach as part of palliative and nursing 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.

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)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.383 · 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