MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7083347325

Quality of life in people with cancer in palliative care

2012· article· en· W7083347325 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueKTH Publication Database DiVA (KTH Royal Institute of Technology) · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobal Political and Economic Relations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPalliative careAffect (linguistics)Quality of life (healthcare)Theme (computing)Qualitative researchShame
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Cancer is a leading cause of death worldwide and accounted for 7.6 million deaths, about 13% of all deaths, in 2008. Several factors can affect patients' quality of life such as physical and psychological symptoms, relationship to people around and the environment. In palliative care professionals need to have good knowledge in order to improve patient quality of life and to give them as good a life as possible in the final stages of life. Aim: The purpose of this overview study is to describe the experiences of quality of life in patients with incurable cancer. Method: We conducted an overview study that was based on ten scientific articles. All articles are qualitative studies, from the year 1995 - 2011, and are from Sweden, Finland, UK, Canada and the USA. Qualitative analysis was used to group the various themes and subthemes for overview study purpose. As a theoretical framework served Katie Erikson’s theory of caring, suffering, and health. Results: Four themes with a total of eleven subthemes were distinguished; the importance of relationships for the perceived quality of life, experiences that affect quality of life positively, experiences that affect quality of life negatively and impact of care environment on perceived quality of life. The first theme includes three subthemes: relationship to family and friends, higher power and personnel. The second theme includes four subthemes: to feel hope, to accept, to take responsibility and to be independent. The third theme includes two subthemes: to feel anxiety, shame and guilt, and to lose functions and roles. In the final theme, there are two subthemes: to being cared for at home and to be cared for in health care. Discussion: The method was discussed including the selection of keywords, databases, and how we came up with relevant articles on the result including manual search. The results were discussed on how patients' experiences affect their quality of life from the point of view of Katie Erikson's theories of caring, suffering and health. The fact that patients experience high or low quality of life depends on various factors connected to how patients themselves experience their health and the reactions from people around them. Keywords: Cancer, quality of life, palliative care, experience

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.369
Threshold uncertainty score0.964

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.052
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKTH Publication Database DiVA (KTH Royal Institute of Technology)Same topicGlobal Political and Economic RelationsFrench-language works237,207