Interventions for behavioral health comorbidities in the hospice setting: a scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Behavioral health (BH) comorbidities in hospice patients are widespread and impact important outcomes, including symptom burden, quality of life, and caregiver wellbeing. However, evidence-based BH interventions tailored for the hospice setting remain understudied. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review with the objective of mapping studies of interventions for BH comorbidities in the hospice setting. We included empirical studies among hospice patients of interventions with BH outcomes. We abstracted data on study design, intervention type, and patient characteristics. RESULTS: Our search generated 7,672 unique results, of which 37 were ultimately included in our analysis. Studies represented 16 regions, with the United Kingdom (n=13) most represented. The most frequent intervention type was complementary and alternative interventions (n=13), followed by psychotherapeutic interventions (n=12). Most of the studies were either pilot or feasibility investigations. Fifteen studies employed a randomized controlled trial design. The most frequently utilized measurement tools for BH outcomes included the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale. Seventeen studies demonstrated statistically significant results in a BH outcome measure. BH conditions prevalent among hospice patients that were the focus of intervention efforts included depression symptoms, anxiety symptoms, and general psychological distress. No study focused on trauma-related disorders or substance use disorders. CONCLUSIONS: This scoping review reveals a concerning gap in research regarding evidence-based BH interventions in hospice settings, especially in the U.S. Despite extensive utilization of hospice care services and the high prevalence of BH conditions among hospice patients, randomized controlled trials focused on improving BH outcomes remain scant. The current BH practices, like the widespread use of benzodiazepines and antipsychotics, may not be rooted in robust evidence, underscoring an urgent need for investment in hospice research infrastructure and tailored clinical trials to test behavioral approaches to mitigate mental health outcomes at the end of life.
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 | 0.017 | 0.084 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.017 | 0.016 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".