MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308687025 · doi:10.1177/02692163221136160

Palliative care for adolescents and young adults with advanced illness: A scoping review

2022· review· en· W4308687025 on OpenAlexaff
Mohamed Abdelaal, Jonathan Avery, Ronald Chow, Nasreen Saleem, Rouhi Fazelzad, Pamela J. Mosher, Breffni Hannon, Camilla Zimmermann, Ahmed al‐Awamer

Bibliographic record

VenuePalliative Medicine · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of TorontoOttawa HospitalPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsycINFOMedicinePalliative careMEDLINEYoung adultLimitingSystematic reviewFamily medicineEnd-of-life careGerontologyPediatricsNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Age-related complex medical conditions have been commonly reported among adolescents and young adults with advanced life-limiting illness. There is increasing interest in exploring their palliative care needs and end-of-life experiences. Aim: This scoping review aimed to explore the available literature about providing palliative and end-of-life care to adolescents and young adults with advanced life-limiting illnesses. Design: Scoping review. This review was registered on Open Science Framework ( https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/SPTD7 ). Data sources: Electronic databases (MEDLINEALL, Embase, Emcare, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trial CENTRAL, Scopus, PsycINFO, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews), Google Scholar and reference lists were searched up to October 2021. We included studies reporting on adolescents and/or young adults with advanced life-limiting illnesses. There were no limitations concerning location, type of illness or study design. Results: We identified 51 studies published between 2002 and 2021. Most studies were published in the United States ( n = 34, 67%), and nine studies (18%) reported exclusively on patients with non-malignant illnesses. Two thirds of the identified studies were case reports and retrospective chart reviews ( n = 33). Three main topics were identified: Physical symptom burden ( n = 26, 51%), Psychological and social needs ( n = 33, 65%), and end-of-life care ( n = 30, 59%). Twenty-six studies (51%) were focused only on one topic, and the age range used to identify adolescents and young adults varied based on the study location. Conclusion: The findings of this review shed light on the different palliative care experiences and knowledge gaps related to adolescents and young adults as an underserved and vulnerable patient population. Further research needs to be dedicated toward palliative care programs tailored for adolescents and young adults.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.405
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.339 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations43
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePalliative MedicineSame topicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207