A Review on the Management of Symptoms in Patients with Incurable Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Palliative care aims to alleviate suffering and prioritize the quality of life of patients facing serious and fatal diseases, such as cancer. Cancer patients, especially in advanced stages, often have many difficult-to-control symptoms, such as pain, fatigue, dyspnea, anxiety, and depression, requiring the attention of a multidisciplinary team highly trained in palliative care and end-of-life management. Pain, dyspnea, nausea, and vomiting are the focus of symptomatic assessment in palliative care, but patients experience other equally important symptoms that do not receive as much attention and are often overlooked, which negatively impacts the quality of life of these patients. One of the main aims of palliative care is to provide patients with the best possible quality of life through adequate symptom control, teamwork, and psychosocial support based on the principles, values, and wishes of the patient and family. In this review, the authors summarize the management of common symptoms in patients in oncology and palliative care, as well as present a brief reflection on quality of life in this context.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".