Young Adult Experience in an Outpatient Interdisciplinary Palliative Care Cancer Clinic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Young adults (YAs; defined as 18-39 years of age) with advanced cancer are a group for whom standardized age-appropriate palliative care has not been established. The purpose of this study was to explore the YA experience and perceptions of palliative care in an outpatient interdisciplinary palliative care clinic for this population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Using an interpretive descriptive design, semistructured interviews were conducted with 12 YAs with advanced cancer who were being seen jointly by a palliative care physician and psychiatrist in an ambulatory palliative care clinic. Interviews explored participants' understanding and experiences of receiving palliative care. Six family members were also interviewed to build on the YA experience. Data collection and analysis occurred concurrently, drawing on the constructivist grounded theory method to analyze the data. RESULTS: Participants described being referred to and seen in the interdisciplinary palliative care clinic as a conflicting and at times difficult experience because of the feeling of being categorized as palliative as YAs. Even so, there were key aspects associated with the specific palliative care approach that allowed YAs to cope with this new label, leading to a beneficial experience, specifically: provided YAs with time and space to explore the experience of having cancer at a younger age, created repeat opportunities to talk openly with people who "got it," and highlighted the importance of including family support in the care of YAs. CONCLUSION: YAs who were referred to the interdisciplinary palliative care clinic struggled with the category of palliative care but also found the care they received beneficial. Findings provide an approach to palliative care tailored to YAs with advanced cancer.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".