MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1880857710

Dying at home: experience of the Verdun local community service centre.

2015· article· en· W1880857710 on OpenAlexaffabout
Brigitte Gagnon Kiyanda, Geneviève Dechêne, Robert Marchand

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsCollege of Family Physicians of CanadaOptech (Canada)Centre for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTerminally illMedicinePalliative careNursing homesNursingPlace of deathService (business)Family medicineMedical emergencyBusiness
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate that it is possible for a team of palliative care nurses in an urban centre to care for more than 50% of their terminally ill patients at home until they die, and that medical care delivered in the home is a determining factor in death at home versus death in a hospital. DESIGN: Analysis of place of death of terminally ill patients who died in 2012 and 2013 (N = 212) and who had been cared for by palliative care nurses, by type of medical care. SETTING: The centre local de services communautaires (CLSC) in Verdun, Que, an urban neighbourhood in southwest Montreal. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 212 terminally ill patients. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Rate of deaths at home. RESULTS: Of the 212 patients cared for at home by palliative care nurses, 56.6% died at home; 62.6% received medical home care from CLSC physicians, compared with 5.0% who did not receive medical home care from any physician. CONCLUSION: Combined with a straightforward restructuring of the nursing care delivered by CLSCs, development of medical services delivered in the home would enable the more than 50% of terminally ill patients in Quebec who are cared for by CLSCs to die at home--something that most of them wish for.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.391
Threshold uncertainty score0.788

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.224
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.138 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations6
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues→French-language works237,207→