MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2800710648 · doi:10.21037/apm.2018.04.04

The Portuguese versions of the This Is ME Questionnaire and the Patient Dignity Question: tools for understanding and supporting personhood in clinical care

2018· article· en· W2800710648 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Palliative Medicine · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPatient Dignity and Privacy
Canadian institutionsCancerCare Manitoba
FundersEuropean Regional Development FundFundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
KeywordsDignityPersonhoodMedicinePortugueseHealth careInformed consentNursingFamily medicineAlternative medicineLawPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Modern medicine can be impersonal and routinized, paying insufficient attention to issues of personhood. The Patient Dignity Question (PDQ) and This Is ME (TIME) Questionnaire are clinical tools developed with the aim of probing for personhood, reinforcing dignity and promoting health care attitudes based on looking at people for who they are and not defining them solely based on their medical condition. This study aimed to translate and validate the TIME Questionnaire and the PDQ into European Portuguese, coined as Questionário Este Sou EU (ESEU) and Pergunta da Dignidade (PD), respectively. METHODS: A three-stage research design, namely: a forward and back translation process (which included an expert committee panel), collected data on a sample of 43 non-institutionalized active elderly for the validation stage and a final expert panel consultation. Inclusion criteria: being 50 years old or older; ability to provide written informed consent; ability to read, speak and understand Portuguese. RESULTS: The original TIME authors fully endorsed the back translated version. A Portuguese version was created. Forty-three participants (response rate of 62%) were included, 53% of whom were male. The average age was 69 years old (range, 60-80 years old). The interviewed elderly strongly felt that the ESEU's summary captured their essence as a person beyond whatever health problems they might be experiencing (6.8, SD =0.48), heightened their sense of dignity (6.1, SD =1.48), considered important that health care professionals (HCPs) have access to ESEU´s summary (6.6, SD =0.73) and that this information could affect the way HCPs see and care for them (6.4, SD =0.86), rated on a Likert scale: 1 "strongly disagree"-7 "strongly agree". According to the experts' evaluations, the translated ESEU Questionnaire was clear, precise, comprehensible and captured important dimensions of personhood. CONCLUSIONS: The Questionário ESEU and the PD are clear, precise, comprehensible and well-aligned in terms of measuring aspects of personhood. This measure could add additional value to the patient-healthcare provider relationship, allowing a new perspective on how healthcare professionals perceive patients in suffering, ensuring they acknowledge not just patienthood, but critical dimensions of personhood.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.136
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.262
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.190 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it