MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210815386 · doi:10.1186/s12904-022-00910-x

Chemotherapy during the last 30 days of life and the role of palliative care referral, a single center experience

2022· article· en· W4210815386 on OpenAlexaff
Indryas Woldie, Tarek Elfiki, Swati Kulkarni, Colvin Springer, Eric McArthur, Nicole Freeman

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Palliative Care · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreWindsor Clinical ResearchWindsor Regional Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineChemotherapyPalliative careReferralCancerLung cancerInternal medicineQuality of life (healthcare)OncologyIntensive care medicineFamily medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Chemotherapy use closer to the end of life is a marker of poor-quality care. There are now multiple studies and local reviews addressing this issue. Understanding the practice locally will give valuable insight and opportunity for improvement. Methods The study is a retrospective chart review of patients on chemotherapy at the Windsor Regional Cancer Center who died between April 1st, 2016 to December 31st, 2018. Information on demographics, type of cancer, type, intent and route of chemotherapy, line of chemotherapy, referral to hospice and palliative care services was collected. Results A total of 681 patients on chemotherapy died between April 1st, 2016 to Dec 13th, 2018. Of these, 119 (17.4 %) died within 30 days following chemotherapy. Chemotherapy was parenteral (Intravenous and Subcutaneous) for the majority (75.2%) of the patients. Most (66.4%) of the patients died of disease progression. Intent for chemotherapy was palliative in 85% of patients, adjuvant/neoadjuvant in 6.6% and curative in 8.4% of the patients. Chemotherapy was 1st, 2nd, 3rd line or more in 67.4%, 21.3% and 11.3% of the patients respectively. The type of chemotherapy was conventional in 74.3% of patients and targeted/immunotherapy in 25.7% of patients. Of the variables studied, lack of palliative referral and having lung cancer or melanoma were significantly associated with higher risk of getting chemotherapy within the last 30 days of life. The odds of getting chemotherapy within the last 30 days of life was 0.35, 95% CI (0.24-0.53), P <0.001 for those who were referred to palliative care. On the other hand, the odds of getting chemotherapy were 4.18, 95% CI (1.17-13.71), P = 0.037 and 2.21, 95% CI (1.24-4.01), P = 0.037 for those with melanoma and lung cancer respectively. In addition, those with early referral to palliative care (90 days or more prior to death) were least likely to receive chemotherapy within the last 30 days of life. Conclusion Administration of chemotherapy within the last 30 days of life could cause unnecessary suffering to patients and cost to society. Early referral to palliative care was significantly associated with reduced risk of getting chemotherapy within the last 30 days of life in this study. Prospective study is recommended to further investigate the role of early palliative referral on use of chemotherapy during the last 30 days of life.

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)0.004
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Citations33
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Palliative CareSame topicPalliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesFrench-language works237,207