MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391191150 · doi:10.58837/chula.cmj.65.3.9

Anxiety in caregivers of palliative care patients

2021· article· en· W4391191150 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Worasiri Leongnarktongdee

Bibliographic record

VenueChulalongkorn Medical Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFamily Support in Illness
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKing Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital
KeywordsPalliative careAnxietyPsychologyMedicineNursingPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Palliative care service undoubtedly aims at quality of life of both the patients and their family members. Caring for the ill can bring about mental burden to the caregivers; but this is understudied in Thai literature. Objective: This study aimed to explore the anxiety state and associated factors in caregivers of palliative patients, particularly in urban setting as Bangkok. Methods: We recruited 93 caregivers of inpatients consulted to the Palliative Care Unit of King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital. The instruments used include Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS) - Thai version and The State - Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI Form). Multiple linear Regression Analysis was used to examine the associated factors of anxiety among family caregivers. Results: Multiple regression analysis found that caregiver’s age (P = 0.04), caregiver’s relationship to the patient (P = 0.01), and caregiver’s STAI trait score (P = 0.1 ) had significant association with the caregiver’s STAI state score, with effect size (f2) of 0.04 (small), 0.03 (small), and 0.21 (medium), respectively. In subgroup analysis of relative – only family caregiver, multivariate analysis found the following factors caregiver’s age (P = 0.02), caregiver’s STAI trait score (P = 0.0), patient’s gender (P = 0.046) reached significant association with the caregiver’s STAI state score. Conclusion: Certain demographic factors (caregiver’s age, degree of relation, and trait anxiety) associated with caregiver’s anxiety. However, ESAS, the rating for perceived symptom severity, did not show significant association.

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)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.129
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChulalongkorn Medical JournalSame topicFamily Support in IllnessFrench-language works237,207