MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1978772788 · doi:10.1111/hex.12169

Development of a model to guide decision making in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis multidisciplinary care

2013· article· en· W1978772788 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Expectations · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAmyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersDepartment of Health and Ageing, Australian Government
KeywordsAmyotrophic lateral sclerosisMultidisciplinary approachPsychologyMedicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationDiseaseSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) face numerous decisions for symptom management and quality of life. Models of decision making in chronic disease and cancer care are insufficient for the complex and changing needs of patients with ALS . OBJECTIVE: The aim was to examine the question: how can decision making that is both effective and patient-centred be enacted in ALS multidisciplinary care? SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Fifty-four respondents (32 health professionals, 14 patients and eight carers) from two specialized ALS multidisciplinary clinics participated in semi-structured interviews. Interviews were transcribed, coded and analysed thematically. RESULTS: Comparison of stakeholder perspectives revealed six key themes of ALS decision making. These were the decision-making process; patient-centred focus; timing and planning; information sources; engagement with specialized ALS services; and access to non-specialized services. A model, embedded in the specialized ALS multidisciplinary clinic, was derived to guide patient decision making. The model is cyclic, with four stages: 'Participant Engagement'; 'Option Information'; 'Option Deliberation'; and 'Decision Implementation'. DISCUSSION: Effective and patient-centred decision making is enhanced by the structure of the specialized ALS clinic, which promotes patients' symptom management and quality of life goals. However, patient and carer engagement in ALS decision making is tested by the dynamic nature of ALS, and patient and family distress. Our model optimizes patient-centred decision making, by incorporating patients' cyclic decision-making patterns and facilitating carer inclusion in decision processes. CONCLUSIONS: The model captures the complexities of patient-centred decision making in ALS. The framework can assist patients and carers, health professionals, researchers and policymakers in this challenging disease environment.

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.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.904
Threshold uncertainty score0.538

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.411
Teacher spread0.314 · 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