Applied patient-level palliative care interventions designed to meet the needs of sexual and gender minorities: A scoping review and qualitative content analysis of how to support sexual and gender minorities at end of life
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sexual and gender minorities experience considerable health disparities across the life span. End of life presents unique challenges for this population, further exacerbating existing disparities. AIM: We aimed to identify applied patient-level palliative care interventions for sexual and gender minorities and describe how said interventions met the needs of these populations at end of life. DESIGN: We conducted a scoping review in keeping with the updated Arksey and O'Malley Framework. All included reports were analyzed qualitatively to describe the intervention and summarize thematically how it met the needs of sexual and gender minorities at end of life. DATA SOURCES: We conducted searches in MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychInfo, and CINAHL from 1946 to June 10, 2023. Reports were eligible for inclusion if they described a palliative care intervention delivered to sexual and gender minorities, and if the palliative care intervention responded to at least one specific need of the sexual and gender minority population(s) in question. RESULTS: We included and summarized 27 reports. We identified three overarching themes describing how palliative care interventions responded to the needs of sexual and gender minorities at end of life. CONCLUSIONS: This review responds to a need to improve palliative care delivery for sexual and gender minorities. Recommendations derived from these interventions, including how to center and advocate for sexual and gender minorities at end of life, can be applied by any interdisciplinary palliative care provider.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".