Comfort while Dying: a Transnational History of Pediatric End of Life Care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Through an in-depth analysis of current and historical literature, this thesis explores the question: what is hospice and end of life care for children? I will dissect the various dimensions of children’s hospice care and how it has evolved over time. Also in my thesis, I will draw from my personal experiences in volunteering at a children’s hospice to discuss the support and care that volunteers receive. Through this literature review I hope to bring to light to a subject that is often overlooked or too difficult for people to discuss. I will propose plans to better the care for children and families who are facing the end of life. My thesis will summarize the current literature available about the type of care that children receive worldwide and how this care affects families and children’s well-being. There has been minimal research done on children in end of life due to the topic’s sensitive nature. My goals is to inform the public of an under discussed but important topic in paediatric medicine.
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 | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".