MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4398181187 · doi:10.21037/apm-23-471

Palliative psychiatry: research, clinical, and educational priorities

2024· article· en· W4398181187 on OpenAlexafffund
Sarah Levitt, Rachel Beth Cooper, Mona Gupta, Jeffrey Kirby, Lucy Panko, Daniel Rosenbaum, Kelli Stajduhar, Manuel Trachsel, Danusha Vinoraj, Anna Lisa Westermair, Anne Woods, Daniel Z. Buchman

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Palliative Medicine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of OttawaCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthUniversity of TorontoDalhousie UniversityUniversity of VictoriaUniversité de Montréal
FundersInstitute of Neurosciences, Mental Health and Addiction
KeywordsMedicinePsychiatryPalliative careFamily medicineMedical educationIntensive care medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Palliative psychiatry has been proposed as a new clinical construct within mental health care and aims to improve quality of life (QoL) for individuals experiencing severe and persistent mental illness (SPMI). To date, explorations of palliative psychiatry have been largely theoretical, and more work is needed to develop its approaches into tangible clinical practice. METHODS: In this paper, we synthesize existing literature with discussions held at a one-day knowledge user meeting titled "A Community of Practice for Palliative Psychiatry" to generate priorities for research, clinical practice, and education that will help advance the development of palliative psychiatry. RESULTS: Palliative psychiatry will benefit from research that is co-produced by people with lived experience (PWLE) of mental illness, that clarifies contested concepts within mental health care and wider medicine, and that adapts existing interventions that have the potential to improve the QoL of individuals experiencing SPMI into the mental health care context. Specific methods and tools might be developed for use in clinical spaces taking a palliative psychiatry approach. More work must be done to understand the populations that might benefit from palliative psychiatry, and to mitigate mental health care providers' (MHCPs') anxieties about using these approaches in their work. As palliative psychiatry is developed, current MHCPs, trainees, individuals experiencing SPMI, and their loved ones will all require education about and orientation to this novel approach within mental health care. CONCLUSIONS: There are several priorities in research, clinical practice, and education that can help advance the development of palliative psychiatry. All future work must be considered through a human rights-based, anti-oppressive lens. Research projects, clinical models, and educational initiatives should all be developed in co-production with PWLE to mitigate the epistemic injustices common in mental health care.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.062
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.074
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.330

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0620.074
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0090.013
Scholarly communication0.0160.021
Open science0.0040.015
Research integrity0.0180.018
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.003

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 head0.551
GPT teacher head0.620
Teacher spread0.069 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations10
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Palliative MedicineSame topicPalliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesFrench-language works237,207