Hospice Palliative Care Volunteers’ Experiences With Unusual End-of-Life Phenomena
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
Forty-five Canadian hospice palliative care volunteers responded to a survey examining whether they had witnessed or been told about any unusual end-of-life phenomena (EOLP) in their work with dying patients and their families in the past year. The most commonly witnessed EOLP were patients talking to or reaching out their hands toward deceased relatives or friends (34%), occurrences of terminal lucidity (33%), and patients seemingly getting ready for a trip or journey (28%). At least a third of the volunteers indicated that a patient or a patient’s family member had told them about visions or dreams of deceased relatives or friends (47% and 44%, respectively), seeing beautiful places or colors or hearing wonderful music (38%), terminal lucidity (38%), and deathbed coincidences (33%). The majority of volunteers were accepting of spiritual explanations for EOLP and rejecting of scientific or medical ones. Ninety-six percent of the volunteers felt that information about EOLP should be included as part of their volunteer training.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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