MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2975038411 · doi:10.1017/s1478951519000798

Adapting the Portuguese dignity question framework for adolescents: ages 10–18

2019· article· en· W2975038411 on OpenAlexaff
Miguel Julião, Bárbara Antunes, Ana Carolina da Silva Santos, María Ana Sobral, Sara Albuquerque, Filipa Fareleira, Daniela Runa, Paulo Faria de Sousa, Petra Chaves, Célia Gonçalves, Duarte Soares, Harvey Max Chochinov

Bibliographic record

VenuePalliative & Supportive Care · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPatient Dignity and Privacy
Canadian institutionsResearch Institute in Oncology and HematologyCancerCare Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPortugueseDignityGerontologyMedicinePsychologyPolitical sciencePhilosophyLawLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Dignity therapy (DT) is well established in adult populations, and it is likely that it could benefit younger people. This study aimed to adapt the adult Portuguese DT question framework for adolescents (DT-QF-Adol) (ages 10-18). METHOD: Five stages were followed: (1) the Portuguese DT-QF for adults was adapted for adolescents with the original author's collaboration, (2) an expert committee provided feedback on the adapted version, (3) an initial consensus version of the DT-QF-Adol was created, (4) expert committee consult affirmed final consensus, and (5) validation stage with a sample of 17 adolescents followed in ambulatory psychology clinic. RESULTS: DT's original author endorsed the final Portuguese DT-QF-Adol, reinforcing that it captures the fundamental dimensions of DT. There was 100% agreement on the final consensus version and defined age group (10-18 years old). Twenty adolescents were invited to participate, and 17 were included after informed consent was obtained; 53% were female. The average age was 12.7 years. The interviewed adolescents reported that the DT-QF-Adol was clear, and they did not identify any ambiguity or difficulty in answering any of the questions. They assumed that this information could positively affect the way parents and friends see and cared for them, permitting others to understand their concerns and preferences. Participants felt that the DT-QF-Adol could be a good starting point for a conversation with their loved ones. Although they did not consider vital for health professionals to access their answers, they strongly felt that the DT-QF-Adol might be essential to sick adolescents and they would recommend it to others. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: We developed a DT-QF of nine questions for Portuguese adolescents (DT-QF-Adol), coined Protocolo de Perguntas da Terapia da Dignidade para Adolescentes - 10-18 anos. This tool can potentially be considered a good addition for pediatric palliative care.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.038
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.127

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.038
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.300 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations28
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePalliative & Supportive CareSame topicPatient Dignity and PrivacyFrench-language works237,207