MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2066726067 · doi:10.12927/hcq.2013.20878

Costs of End-of-Life Care: Findings from the Province of Saskatchewan

2009· article· en· W2066726067 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Marcus J. Hollander

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare Quarterly · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHealth careHealth informationFiscal yearMedicineEnvironmental healthBusinessGerontologyPolitical scienceFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As 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 characterize selected aspects of healthcare at the end of life. In-depth 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 paper 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."

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.415
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.320 · 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

Citations25
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcare QuarterlySame topicPalliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesFrench-language works237,207