MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2056984434 · doi:10.1177/0269216314566060

Admission of the very elderly to the intensive care unit: Family members’ perspectives on clinical decision-making from a multicenter cohort study

2015· article· en· W2056984434 on OpenAlexafffund
Daren K. Heyland, Peter Dodek, Sangeeta Mehta, Allan Garland, Henry T. Stelfox, Sean M. Bagshaw, Demetrios J. Kutsogiannis, Karen E. A. Burns, John Muscedere, Alexis F. Turgeon, Rob Fowler, Xuran Jiang, Andrew G. Day

Bibliographic record

VenuePalliative Medicine · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalCentre hospitalier universitaire de QuébecSunnybrook HospitalQueen's UniversitySt. Michael's HospitalUniversity of AlbertaKingston General HospitalUniversity of CalgaryMount Sinai HospitalAlberta Health ServicesMcMaster UniversitySt. Paul's HospitalUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of TorontoClinical Evaluation Research UnitUniversity of Manitoba
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineIntensive care unitCohortIntensive careCohort studyPalliative careFamily medicineProspective cohort studyFamily memberQuality of life (healthcare)Intensive care medicineNursingInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the perspectives and experiences of family members of very elderly patients who are admitted to the intensive care unit. AIM: To describe family members' perspectives about care provided to very elderly critically ill patients. DESIGN: Multicenter, prospective, cohort study. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: In total, 535 family members of patients aged 80 years or older admitted to 22 intensive care units for more than 24 h. RESULTS: Family members reported that the "patient be comfortable and suffer as little as possible" was their most important value and "the belief that life should be preserved at all costs" was their least important value considered in making treatment decisions. Most family members (57.9%) preferred that life support be used for their family member, whereas 24.1% preferred comfort measures only, and 14.4% were unsure of their treatment preferences. Only 57.3% reported that a doctor had talked to them about treatment options for the patient. Overall, 29.7% of patients received life-sustaining treatments for more than 7 days and 50.3% of these died in hospital. Families were most satisfied with the skill and competency of nurses and least satisfied with being included and supported in the decision-making process and with their sense of control over the patient's care. CONCLUSION: There is incongruity between family values and preferences for end-of-life care and actual care received for very elderly patients who are admitted to the intensive care unit. Deficiencies in communication and decision-making may be associated with prolonged use of life-sustaining treatments in very elderly critically ill patients, many of whom ultimately die.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationalhigh
grokno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationalhigh
opusno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationalhigh
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.256
Threshold uncertainty score0.984

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.202
GPT teacher head0.492
Teacher spread0.290 · 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

Labeled directly by 3 models reading the full record.

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

Citations73
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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