End-of-life issues in advanced dementia: Part 2: management of poor nutritional intake, dehydration, and pneumonia.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To answer frequently asked questions about management of end-stage pneumonia, poor nutritional intake, and dehydration in advanced dementia. SOURCES OF INFORMATION: Ovid MEDLINE was searched for relevant articles published until February 2015. No level I studies were identified; most articles provided level III evidence. The symptom management suggestions are partially based on recent participation in a Delphi procedure to develop a guideline for optimal symptom relief for patients with pneumonia and dementia. MAIN MESSAGE: Feeding tubes are not recommended for patients with end-stage dementia. Comfort feeding by hand is preferable. Use of parenteral hydration might be helpful but can also contribute to discomfort at the end of life. Withholding or withdrawing artificial nutrition and hydration is generally not associated with manifestations of discomfort if mouth care is adequate. Because pneumonia usually causes considerable discomfort, clinicians should pay attention to symptom control. Sedation for agitation is often useful in patients with dementia in the terminal phase. CONCLUSION: Symptomatic care is an appropriate option for end-stage manifestations of advanced dementia. The proposed symptom management guidelines are based on a literature review and expert consensus.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".