MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4310943227 · doi:10.1017/s1478951522001638

The Italian validation of the Death and Dying Distress Scale

2022· article· en· W4310943227 on OpenAlexaffabout
Andrea Bovero, Luigi Zerbinati, Luigi Grassi, Kenneth Mah, Gary Rodin, Sarah Hales, Carmine Malfitano, Elisa Tiberto, Paolo Leombruni, Marco Miniotti, Rosangela Caruso

Bibliographic record

VenuePalliative & Supportive Care · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDeath Anxiety and Social Exclusion
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeath anxietyExploratory factor analysisConfirmatory factor analysisAnxietyClinical psychologyMedicineDistressRegretPalliative careScale (ratio)PsychiatryPsychometricsPsychologyStructural equation modelingNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Death anxiety (DA), a condition characterized by fear, angst, or panic related to the awareness of one's own death, is commonly observed in advanced cancer patients. The aim of this study was to examine the psychometric properties of the Italian version of the Death and Dying Distress Scale (DADDS-IT) in a sample of patients with advanced cancer. METHODS: The sample included 200 Italian advanced cancer patients meeting eligibility criteria to access palliative care. Patients' levels of DA were assessed by using the DADDS-IT, while the levels of depression, anxiety, demoralization, spiritual well-being, and symptom burden were assessed using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9, the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7, the Demoralization Scale, the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Spiritual Well-Being Scale, and the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System, respectively; Karnofsky Performance Status was used to measure functional impairment. Confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) of previous structures and exploratory factor analyses (EFA) were conducted. RESULTS: = 0.73), accounting for the 77.1% of the variance. Dying subscore was higher in hospice patients than in those recruited in medical wards. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: The present study provides further evidence that DA is a condition that deserves attention and that DADDS-IT shows good psychometric properties to support its use in research and clinical settings.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.881

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.296 · 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.

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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePalliative & Supportive CareSame topicDeath Anxiety and Social ExclusionFrench-language works237,207