MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Ethics in the Intensive Care Unit with Emphasis on Medical Futility in Comatose Survivors of Cardiac Arrest

2000· article· en· W2015552930 on OpenAlexaff
G. Bryan Young

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntensive care unitCertaintyMedical ethicsEthical issuesMedicineLife Support CareQuality of life (healthcare)Intensive careMedical emergencyIntensive care medicinePsychologyMEDLINENursingEngineering ethicsPsychiatryPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Medical futility refers to situations or cases in which treatment offers no meaningful benefit to the patient. Brain death does not pose a management problem because patients are considered to be dead. Management of other cases requires sequential considerations. First, the prognosis must be established with certainty. Then, if it is determined that there is no possibility of the patient regaining conscious awareness, a level of care should be decided through discussions involving the physician and significant others. Usually there is a consensus that high-level intensive care is not justified to maintain such a low quality of life. When the patient's advance directives or the substitute decision maker's request differs from the physician's recommendations, there are methods of resolving the issues that respect ethical and legal principles.

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)0.027
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.046
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.144

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0270.046
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.033
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0150.013
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 head0.236
GPT teacher head0.506
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations8
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical NeurophysiologySame topicPalliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesFrench-language works237,207