A Digital Platform (Telepalliation) for Patients in Palliative Care and Their Relatives: Protocol for a Multimethod Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization defines end-of-life palliative care as "prevention and relief of suffering, by means of early identification and impeccable assessment and treatment of pain and other problems, physical, psychosocial and spiritual." Over 20 million people worldwide are in need of palliative care. In Denmark, palliative care is given at a general and a specialist level. The general level comprises health care professionals (HCPs) who do not perform palliative care full-time. The specialist level comprises specialized palliative care (SPC), where HCPs perform palliative care full-time. In total, 20%-30% of patients who need palliative care are referred to SPC. Challenges with SPC include a short time span from referral to end of life, patients who are very ill and may therefore find it hard to travel to an outpatient clinic, and the SPC unit having a relatively small staff. The need for SPC is expected to rise, as the number of patients dying from terminal diseases is increasing. Telehealth has been successfully implemented in different home care settings, including palliative care. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study is to present the research design of the clinical testing of a telepalliation program by the use of a digital platform for patients in palliative care and their relatives. METHODS: The telepalliation program will be conducted as a multimethod randomized controlled trial. The intervention group will follow the telepalliation program, while the control group will follow the traditional standard of care program for palliative care. The primary outcome of the study is increased quality of life. Secondary outcomes include enhanced sense of security; reduced experience of pain; satisfactory experiences of patients and relatives with the TelePal platform and degree of satisfaction in being a part of the program; experiences with the use of the TelePal platform on the part of HCPs and the professionals' experiences of being a part of the program; the use of a cross-sector communication platform and the telepalliation program by patients, relatives, and HCPs; and the projected lower cost of health care services. These outcomes will be assessed using questionnaires, data generated by digital technologies, and semistructured interviews. RESULTS: The collection of data began in May 2021 and will be completed in August 2024. The results of the study will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at international conferences. Results from the telepalliation program are expected to be published by fall 2024. CONCLUSIONS: The expected outcomes of the study are increased quality of life and increased sense of security. We also expect that the study will have a clinical impact on future telepalliation for those patients who are referred to a palliative team. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04995848; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04995848. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/49946.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.028 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.071 | 0.010 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".