Unravelling the meaning of suffering in the context of euthanasia and assisted suicide: a multiperspective meta-ethnography
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
This meta-ethnography aims to unravel the meaning of suffering in the context of euthanasia and assisted suicide (EAS) using a multiperspective and international framework. More precisely, we seek to understand how the experience of suffering is (1) interpreted by the patients with a request, their close ones, and physicians and nurse practitioners who provide EAS and (2) how the cultural context may shape the way suffering is described. Using PRISMA guidelines, we included 19 articles (1) focusing on the experience of suffering; (2) written in Dutch, English, or French; (3) published in a peer-reviewed journal; and (4) using a qualitative design or containing rich qualitative data. Five intertwined dimensions were identified: existential, physical-neurocognitive, psycho-emotional, socio-environmental and systemic. Our results underline the nuances in the description of suffering across perspectives and cultural contexts. Our results may inspire those working on the threshold of suffering to adopt a nuanced and holistic approach when assessing patients with an EAS request.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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