Increasing Access to Palliative Care in Cameroon: Progress, Gaps, and Recommendations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Access to palliative care is an urgent global need. Countries with the greatest palliative care needs have limited access. In Cameroon, demand for palliative care is growing due to the rising incidence of life-limiting conditions. Identifying available palliative care services and programs could provide an understanding of access gaps and inform future roadmaps for palliative care development in the country. We aim to map available palliative care services, identify gaps and inform recommendations to promote early access to palliative care in Cameroon. METHODS: We undertook a literature review of articles reporting any aspects of palliative care in Cameroon. We searched Embase, MEDLINE, Scopus, PsycINFO, CINAHL, PubMed and gray literature. Data were analyzed thematically using the World Health Organization model for the assessment of palliative care development. RESULTS: We identified 41 articles reporting 21 organizations with some form of palliative care services such as clinical services, education, advocacy and research. These were led mostly by individual health care providers or private and faith-based organizations. Major palliative care initiatives included training in the form of workshops, and adult and pediatric outpatient, in-patient and community-based palliative care. There were few reports of oral morphine production, community engagement, advocacy and palliative care research. CONCLUSIONS: Progress in palliative care development was reported in five regions of Cameroon over the last two decades. Findings suggest the need for an intersectoral approach including government, community, and health care stakeholders to achieve sustainable palliative care. This could potentially ensure equitable access to palliative care in Cameroon.
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 | 0.010 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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".