The impact of a breathlessness intervention service (BIS) on the lives of patients with intractable dyspnea: A qualitative phase 1 study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Disabling breathlessness is the most common symptom of advanced cardiopulmonary disease. It is usually intractable, even when patients receive maximal medical therapy for their underlying condition. A pilot study was undertaken to evaluate a newly formed palliative Breathlessness Intervention Service (BIS). METHODS: The methodology followed the Medical Research Council's Framework for the Evaluation of Complex Interventions (Phase I). Qualitative interviews were completed with patients and relatives who had used the service and clinicians who had referred to it. The focus of the interviews was the participants' experience of using BIS. RESULTS: Patients valued the positive educational approach taken to breathlessness, emphasizing what was possible rather than what had been lost. Non-pharmacological strategies, especially the hand-held fan and exercises, were rated very helpful and new to patients. Participants reiterated that breathlessness was frightening and isolating, exacerbating the disability it caused: the easy access to advice and flexibility of BIS helped to alleviate this. Participants wanted a written record of the advice given. Carers welcomed the focus on their needs. Clinicians valued sharing the management of patients with an intractable problem. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: This Phase I study has helped to remodel the service rapidly by uncovering the aspects of BIS that users find most valuable and areas that need change or improvement. The BIS needs to provide written information, to reinforce and extend contacts with other agencies to build on support it already provides for patients and carers, and extend its flexibility and accessibility. Providing a "drop-in" service and continuing education after the initial program of contacts is completed could be a useful service development, warranting further evaluation. A qualitative methodology involving service users and referrers can help to shape service development rapidly.
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 | 0.020 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".