MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004339880 · doi:10.1177/0269216307080822

Taking care of terminally-ill patients at home — the economic perspective revisited

2007· article· en· W2004339880 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Oren Tamir, Yoram Singer, Pesach Shvartzman

Bibliographic record

VenuePalliative Medicine · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institutes of HealthInstitute of Health Services and Policy ResearchIsrael National Institute for Health Policy Research
KeywordsMedicineTerminally illPalliative careFamily medicineGerontologyEmergency medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

End-of-life care can be delivered in a variety of settings, whereby the majority of terminally-ill cancer patients prefer to die at home. The aim of our study is to evaluate health services utilisation during the last year of life, and to compare terminally ill patients who have received home-specialised palliative care services (HSPCS) with patients who died receiving home non-specialised palliative care services. The study included 120 and 515 patients, respectively, who died between 1999-2000. Age and gender distribution were similar in both groups. During the last year of life, mean health services cost per person among the HSPCS group was lower by more then 30% (P < 0.005). The median cost per patient was as low as one-fifth in the last month. Men and the older age group of 65 and above, cost significantly less compared with women and younger patients, respectively, regardless of provider setting. The main differences in health services utilisation were in hospitalisations and oncology treatments (P < 0.01 and P < 0.05, respectively).

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.650

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.334 · 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.

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

Citations40
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePalliative MedicineSame topicPalliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesFrench-language works237,207