MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2985216272 · doi:10.1182/blood-2019-128884

Analysis of the Eligibility of Patients with Sickle Cell Disease for Palliative Care

2019· article· en· W2985216272 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Pedro de Oliveira Toro da Silva, Cristina Bueno Terzi, Antônio Luís Eiras Falcão, Sara T.O. Saad, Fernando Ferreira Costa, Paula de Melo Campos

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemoglobinopathies and Related Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePsychosocialQuality of life (healthcare)DiseasePalliative careUnivariate analysisDeliriumMultivariate analysisAdverse effectPediatricsPhysical therapyIntensive care medicineInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Palliative care (PC) is an approach that improves the quality of life of patients facing problems associated with any disease that leads to multiple or hard to manage symptoms, through the prevention and relief of suffering by early identification and impeccable assessment of physical, psychosocial and spiritual problems. Sickle cell diseases (SCD) consist of a group of congenital diseases characterized by the presence of the sickle hemoglobin (HbS), which can polymerize and predispose to hemolytic and ischemic events. In addition to the acute pain events, sometimes recurrent and hard to control, lesions in target organs commonly occur, leading to multiple comorbidities and serious decrease in quality of life. Aims: To evaluate clinical and demographic factors that could influence physical, psychosocial and spiritual symptom burden and confer eligibility criteria to PC in a group of SCD patients. Methods: Clinical and demographic data of SCD patients were collected by interviews using a standardized questionnaire: diagnosis, time from diagnosis, number of comorbidities and of medical specialties on regular follow up, infectious episodes, need for seeking the emergency and for hospitalization during the last 12 months, delirium events, wounds, dysphagia, recurrent falls, adverse events to medication, quality of communication with the medical team, fears regarding the disease and its complications, religious support, age, gender, monthly household income (MI), level of schooling (SCH) and profession. Specific PC scores were also applied: Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) and Palliative Performance Scale (PPS). Statistical univariate and multivariate analysis were performed. P value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. This research was approved by the Institutional and National Review Board; written informed consent was obtained from all subjects. Results: Fifty-one patients were evaluated (SS, n=34; SC, n=11; SB+, n=3; SB0, n=3), with a median of age of 40 years (18-69). SB0 patients were considered in the SS subgroup for statistical analysis. According to ESAS, pain scores were worse for patients with a higher age (p=0.0039), higher number of children (p=0.0228), for individuals that had completed only primary school versus patients who received more education (p=0.0293), and for the subjects on follow up with three or more medical specialties (p=0.0411). ESAS evaluation for tiredness revealed worse scores for the patients that had no formal occupation versus those who actively work (p=0.0275). ESAS assessment for depression was worse in patients that had a lower MI (p=0.0080), lower SCH (p=0.0585) and for those who had been to emergency services three or more times during the last year (p=0.0290). ESAS for appetite scored worse for older patients (p=0.0165), for those with a lower MI (p=0.0105) and for the individuals with a higher number of comorbidities (p=0.0018). Regarding shortness of breath, ESAS was poorer for older patients (p=0.0330), for those with a lower MI (p=0.0009), for the subjects in follow up with three or more medical specialties (p=0.0064) and for the patients with lower SCH (p=0.0413). ESAS for best wellbeing was worse for the patients with a lower MI (p=0.0425) and for those with lower SCH (p=0.0314). Due to the low incidence of the following symptoms, no differences were observed between groups for ESAS evaluation of nausea, anxiety and drowsiness. PPS score was significantly better for married individuals (p=0.0490) and for those with higher MI (p=0.0121). Finally, patients with no formal occupation showed a significant higher risk of going to the emergency within twelve months (OR=14.286, CI 95% 1.475-142.857, p=0.0217). Conclusions: This study strongly indicated that SCD patients live with chronic limiting symptoms that significantly impair their quality of life, which make them a group eligible for PC. The results showed that age and a higher number of comorbidities significantly impact symptom burden. Importantly, social and economic factors, in particular a lower monthly household income and a worse level of schooling have a major adverse impact on palliative scores. These data reinforce the negative impact of social inequality in this underprivileged group of patients and the need of facing this problem when seeking global patient care. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicHemoglobinopathies and Related DisordersFrench-language works237,207