MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3000959120 · doi:10.1164/rccm.202001-0076ed

When Intensive Care Becomes Good End-of-Life Care

2020· letter· en· W3000959120 sur OpenAlexaff
Hannah Wunsch

Notice bibliographique

RevueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · 2020
Typeletter
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiquePalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Établissements canadiensHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook HospitalMuscular Dystrophy CanadaUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineIntensive careEnd-of-life careIntensive care medicineMEDLINEPalliative careNursing

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

When Intensive Care Becomes Good End-of-Life Care Years ago, I began a research project with colleagues to demonstrate that physicians receive different, and arguably better, endof-life care because of our greater knowledge about dying.We hypothesized, as had others, that physicians would be more likely to die at home, would be less likely to die in an ICU, and would generally receive less "aggressive" care.It took years to complete the study.The findings were not what we had expected: Physicians did receive more palliative care, but they also were more likely to die in an ICU and, among those with cancer, more likely to receive chemotherapy in the last 6 months of life; it was more of everything (1).The work by Rolnick and colleagues (2) in this issue of the Journal (pp.832-839), demonstrating that family satisfaction with end-of-life care for patients dying in the hospital is higher for patients who have received intensive care, is aligned with our findings, and it challenges the general belief regarding what constitutes a "good" death.The study forces us to reevaluate what we strive for as caregivers when we have conversations with patients and families, helping them to navigate the complex decision-making regarding where to go in the hospital for care.This finding regarding greater satisfaction was true among medical and surgical subgroups, as well as when focused on those with severe, life-limiting illnesses.Whether these responses were a reaction to intensive monitoring and invasive support or, as I suspect is often the case, to the reassurance of skilled caregivers is not answered by these data.Although overall satisfaction with care was high, a notable (and very concerning) finding was that only 50% of individuals believed that pain was well controlled.As a physician who is responsible for determining which patients should or should not be admitted to an ICU, I have had my share of frustration admitting patients I believe I cannot help, that my efforts have been wasted because the patient will not leave the hospital or even the ICU.I have felt resentment toward patients and families who have insisted on coming to the ICU because I viewed intensive care primarily through the lens of what I and the rest of the team could do in terms of providing lifesaving therapies.However, that has changed.The man I married just 6 years ago died in June 2019.He was diagnosed with metastatic cancer less than 2 years after our wedding and died 4 years after that.He received palliative care but also chemotherapy in his last week of life and died in the ICU; we were both intensive care physicians, and the story was exactly as told writ large in my own study.There was clearly a comfort in the ICU-the knowledge that excellent nurses and doctors were always available.A symptom such as dyspnea is scary, either to experience oneself or to watch

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,004
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Commentaire · Signal consensuel: Commentaire
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,008
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,027

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0040,023
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0030,004
Communication savante0,0070,005
Science ouverte0,0010,004
Intégrité de la recherche0,0030,006
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0080,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,083
Tête enseignante GPT0,395
Écart entre enseignants0,311 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreCommentaire

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations5
Publié2020
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine→Même sujetPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues→Travaux en français237 207→