MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1973547687 · doi:10.1177/1049909109333928

Length of Survival in Hospice for Cancer Patients Referred From a Comprehensive Cancer Center

2009· article· en· W1973547687 on OpenAlexaff
Tallal Younis, Robert Austin Milch, David Lawrence, Amy L. Mirand, Ellis Levine

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine® · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsQueen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre
FundersRoswell Park Cancer Institute
KeywordsMedicineHospice careMultivariate analysisCancerPalliative careRetrospective cohort studyCohortClinical trialFamily medicineInternal medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This retrospective study examined 180 hospice patients referred from a comprehensive cancer center over 6 months in 2002 to (1) identify the variables associated with shorter length of survival (LOS) in hospice and (2) examine the LOS in hospice for those who previously participated in clinical trials and/or phase I studies. The median LOS in hospice for this cohort was 35 days. In multivariate analysis, low Palliative Performance Score (PPS) at hospice enrollment and male gender were associated with shorter LOS in hospice: males with low PPS had the shortest LOS while females with high PPS had the longest LOS. No correlation was found between the LOS in hospice and prior participation in clinical trials and/or phase I studies.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.333 · 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

Citations24
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine®Same topicPalliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesFrench-language works237,207