Research Note: Describing Canada's Residential Continuing Care Population through an Analysis of a National Mortality Dataset and a Provincial Hospital Dataset
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT While there are 157,000 designated continuing care (CC) beds in Canada – beds that are only used by a rather distinct group of individuals – no comprehensive description of the CC resident population exists. An analysis of 1974–1997 Statistics Canada mortality data and 1992/93–1996/97 Alberta hospital utilization data was undertaken to provide a description of one segment of this population, those at the end of life. Statistics Canada data indicate that only a small (<3%) proportion of deaths take place each year in CC facilities, with these persons 84.5 years of age on average, and most often female (62.5%), widowed (61.9%), and Canadian born (61.8%). The primary cause of death/diagnosis varied considerably, as it did for CC residents in Alberta who were transferred to acute care hospitals before dying there. The average hospital stay for transferred persons was 14.0 days in length, with these hospitalizations normally characterized by few diagnostic tests or treatments (mean=0.9).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".