Advance care planning, palliative care, and end-of-life care interventions for homeless people: A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Homeless individuals have a high prevalence of multiple chronic comorbidities and early mortality compared to the general population. They also experience significant barriers to access and stigmatization in the healthcare system. Providing advance care planning, palliative care, and end-of-life care for this underserved population is an important health issue. AIM: To summarize and evaluate the evidence surrounding advance care planning, palliative care, and end-of-life care interventions for homeless persons. DESIGN: A systematic review based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. DATA SOURCES: Articles from MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Social Work Abstracts, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and PubMed databases were searched through 13 June 2015. Peer-reviewed studies that implemented advance care planning, palliative care, and end-of-life care interventions for homeless populations were included. Data from studies were independently extracted by two investigators using pre-specified criteria, and quality was assessed using modified Cochrane and Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tools. RESULTS: Six articles met inclusion criteria. Two studies were randomized controlled trials involving advance directive completion. Two cohort studies investigated the costs of a shelter-based palliative care intervention and predictors for completing advance directives. These studies were rated low to fair quality. Two qualitative studies explored the interface between harm-reduction services and end-of-life care and the conditions for providing palliative care for homeless persons in a support home. CONCLUSION: The effectiveness of advance care planning, palliative care, and end-of-life care interventions for homeless individuals is uncertain. High-quality studies of interventions that reflect the unique and complex circumstances of homeless populations and investigate patient-related outcomes, caregiver burden, and cost-effectiveness are needed.
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 | 0.010 | 0.041 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".