INSTRUMENTS FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF HOSPITALIZED PATIENTS IN PALLIATIVE CARE: INTEGRATIVE REVIEW
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Objective: to identify the instruments used to assess patients hospitalized in palliative care. Method: integrative literature review carried out in January 2024 on the online data platforms: National Library of Medicine and Latin America and the Caribbean Literature on Health Sciences (LILACS) and the virtual library Scientific Electronic Library Online. Twelve scientific articles were analyzed. Results: Sixteen instruments were identified, seven of them generic, four specific for people in palliative care, four specific for oncology patients and one for the diagnosis of COVID-19. The Palliative Performance Scale and Edmonton Symptom Assessment were the most used instruments in the studies and the most relevant aspects to be evaluated in patients receiving palliative care were functional capacity, physical and psychological symptoms and old age. Conclusion: The instruments were useful as they guided health professionals, assessed patients, and planned care and decision-making.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it