Costs of End-of-Life Care: Findings from the Province of Saskatchewan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A s part of the Health Care Use at the End-of-Life in Western Canada Study, the Western Office of the Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI) collaborated with the ministries or departments of health in British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba to highlight selected aspects of healthcare at the end of life.Indepth supplementary studies were also conducted for each of the four western provinces.Saskatchewan focused its analysis on healthcare costs in the two years before death.This article provides a summary of data on healthcare costs for persons who died in Saskatchewan in the 2003-2004 fiscal year.It is based on a more in-depth report prepared for CIHI and Saskatchewan Health titled "Final Report of the Saskatchewan End-of-Life Care Project."The full report can be freely accessed at www. hollanderanalytical.com.The CIHI reports can be accessed at http://secure.cihi.ca/cihiweb/dispPage.jsp?cw_page=PG_930_ E&cw_topic=930&cw_rel=AR_1729_E. Findings Key New Finding on the Impact of Residential Care in Determining End-of-Life Healthcare Costs
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".