MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1988212746 · doi:10.1097/nor.0000000000000044

Palliative and End-of-Life Care

2014· review· en· W1988212746 on OpenAlexaff
Cheryl L. Petersen, Susan Breakwell, Margaret Faut Callahan

Bibliographic record

VenueOrthopaedic Nursing · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsCanadian Hospice Palliative Care Association
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPalliative careEnd-of-life careTerminal careNursingMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the emergence of reports such as the National Consensus Project for Quality Palliative Care (2013) and the National Association of Orthopaedic Nurses Palliative Care Consensus Document (2005), there continues to be a growing recognition of the multiple adverse effects of serious illness and chronic conditions, as well as the potential benefits of receiving palliative or end-of-life care. As modern technology expands its ability to support life, ethical dilemmas may be encountered in the provision of palliative or end-of-life care. Through integration of the precepts of palliative care and consideration of the relevant ethical principles, orthopaedic nurses may best meet their patients' comprehensive needs at an exceedingly difficult time.

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.952
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.136
GPT teacher head0.454
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrthopaedic NursingSame topicPalliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesFrench-language works237,207