Effectiveness of a palliative care outpatient programme in improving cancer-related symptoms among ambulatory Brazilian 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
The focuses of palliative care are to provide symptom relief and improve quality of life through an interdisciplinary approach. Previous studies conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of palliative care in reducing symptom distress among outpatients confirmed the importance of the palliative care approach. To our knowledge, there is no published information from Brazil regarding the impact of a palliative care outpatient programme in reducing symptom distress. Symptom scores from 232 patients were measured using Edmonton Symptom Assessment System scales in two consecutive consults. Changes in symptoms at follow-up visit were analysed using Wilcoxon signed-rank paired test. The symptom subtraction indices (SSI) (follow-up scores minus baseline scores) were calculated and then analysed with Spearman's correlation. Edmonton Symptom Assessment System median scores at follow-up visits were statistically significant reduced in all symptoms evaluated. All the SSI positively correlated with well-being-SSI. Other important SSI correlations were: fatigue-SSI and anxiety-SSI, and fatigue-SSI and dyspnoea-SSI. Our palliative care outpatient programme was able to provide a significant improvement in the symptoms evaluated. The well-being-SSI was positively correlated with all the SSI, verifying that the control of symptoms in palliative care is essential for the patient well-being. Adequate/inadequate control of specifically symptoms seems to indirectly improve/worsen other symptoms.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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