Medical assistance in dying (MAiD) in Canada: practical aspects for healthcare teams
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
In this paper we document some of the practical aspects of implementing medical assistance in dying (MAiD) since it became legal in Canada in 2016. The percentage of annual deaths in Canada due to MAiD varies widely, ranging from less than 0.5% in some areas to over 5% in others. By the end of 2019, approximately 13,000 people had an assisted death in Canada (1.6% of all deaths). The average age is 73 years and the majority have cancer (64%), followed by end-stage organ failure (17%), and neurological disease (11%). The safeguards in Canadian law include having two witnesses sign the patient request form, having two independent clinicians agree that the patient is eligible, and requiring a 10-day waiting period after the request is made. Although the criminal law is federal and applies throughout the nation, health services managed provincially, and there are many different models of care being used. Some provinces have standardized prescriptions and procedures for assisted dying with centralized care coordinators supporting both patients and providers. Other provinces expect individual providers to manage all aspects of assisted dying. The procedure and medications are provided free of charge to patients, but it took years before many providers were remunerated for their services. Access for patients has been a problem because there are too few providers of care (especially in rural areas), and many people have difficulty getting accurate information about the process. Many faith-based health care facilities continue to refuse to allow assisted dying within their facilities, so patients requesting MAiD need to be transferred to other locations in their last hours of life. Solutions to these problems have included the development of more training and support for providers and the creation of coordinating centres that provide information and support for patients throughout the process. Telemedicine is used for assessment of eligibility when required, especially during the COVID pandemic. There are similarities in problems of access to all end of life care options, including palliative care and residential hospices. The relationships between providers of assisted dying and specialists in palliative care vary, and examples exist throughout the spectrum from collegial to hostile. This is slowly improving, as individual clinicians gain more experience with patients choosing assisted dying. Public culture is changing as there are more conversations occurring about death and dying.
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,018 | 0,034 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,030 | 0,016 |
| Communication savante | 0,015 | 0,007 |
| Science ouverte | 0,005 | 0,017 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,007 | 0,014 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,007 | 0,001 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».