End-of-life care in children and adolescents with cancer: perspectives from a French pediatric oncology care network
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In developed countries, cancer remains the leading cause of pediatric death from illness after the neonatal period. OBJECTIVE: To describe the end-of-life care characteristics of children and adolescents with solid tumors (ST) or hematologic malignancies (HM) who died from tumor progression in the Île-de-France area. METHODS: This is a regional, multicentric, retrospective review of medical files of all children and adolescents with cancer who died over a 1-year period. Extensive data from the last 3 months of life were collected. RESULTS: A total of 99 eligible patients died at a median age of 9.8 years (range, 0.3-24 years). The most frequent terminal symptoms were pain (n = 86), fatigue (n = 84), dyspnea (n = 49), and anorexia (n = 41). Median number of medications per patient was 8 (range, 3-18). Patients required administration of opioids (n = 91), oxygen (n = 36), and/or sedation (n = 61). Decision for palliative care was present in all medical records and do-not-resuscitate orders in 90/99 cases. Symptom prevalence was comparable between children and adolescents with ST and HM. A wish regarding the place of death had been expressed for 64 patients and could be respected in 42 cases. Death occurred in hospital for 75 patients. CONCLUSIONS: This study represents a large and informative cohort illustrating current pediatric palliative care approaches in pediatric oncology. End-of-life remains an active period of care requiring coordination of multiple care teams.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".