Palliative Care for Families: Remembering the Hidden Patients
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Families of patients receiving palliative care are profoundly affected by the challenges of the illness. They observe care that the patient receives, provide care for the patient, and receive support from health professionals in the form of information, counselling, or practical assistance. As they witness and participate in the patient's care, they judge the quality of care that the patient receives. They often see themselves as the patient's care advocates and may harbour regret and guilt if they believe that the patient did not have the best possible care. The illness experience profoundly affects family members' psychological and physical health; recognition of this has coined the term "hidden patients." This article briefly synthesizes empirical work that suggests how to best support families in a palliative care context. We discuss how to define the family, emphasizing a systems approach to family care. We describe the impact of the illness on the family in terms of family members' health, family communication issues, psychological issues, needs for information, physical care demands, and family costs of caring.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it