MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2078479675 · doi:10.12968/bjon.2006.15.3.20510

Death with dignity: devising a withdrawal of treatment process

2006· article· en· W2078479675 on OpenAlexaff
Joanna K Hunter, Tamsin Dean, Jenny Gowan

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Nursing · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsSt. Thomas Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDignityIntensive care unitNursingProcess (computing)MedicinePsychologyPsychiatryPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2002, a study was undertaken at St Thomas' Hospital to ascertain whether nurses felt adequately prepared in caring for patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) during the withdrawal of treatment (WoT) process (Dean, 2002). The study concluded that nurses on the ICU were unclear of the process and lacked confidence and knowledge of WoT. This study inspired the establishment of a WoT steering group to address the many issues involved in this process.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.433
Threshold uncertainty score0.336

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.406
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

Citations7
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of NursingSame topicPalliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesFrench-language works237,207