MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2091963311 · doi:10.1097/tld.0b013e318254d321

The Allied Health Care Professional's Role in Assisting Medical Decision Making at the End of Life

2012· article· en· W2091963311 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueTopics in Language Disorders · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStatuteLegislationHealth careContext (archaeology)PsychologyAdvance care planningPublic relationsMedical educationNursingMedicinePolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As a patient approaches the end of life, he or she faces a number of very difficult medical decisions. Allied health care professionals, including speech–language pathologists (SLPs) and occupational therapists (OTs), can be instrumental in assisting their patients to make advance care plans, although their traditional job descriptions do not include this role. The allied health care professional is often in a trusted position, permitting insight into the values and beliefs of the patient and facilitating the depth of communication necessary when making difficult decisions. Professionals who work with clients at the end of life need to be aware of the many issues surrounding end-of-life decision making and the preparation of advance directives for care. This article provides an overview of the complex issues the practicing clinician needs to keep in mind when assisting clients with advance care planning. This service requires that clinicians step outside their roles as rehabilitation experts, a move that is supported by professional associations. The concepts of medical decision making and informed consent are discussed in the context of decisions made in advance of illness at the end of life. The professional needs also to be aware of the legalities of advance decision making, as laws and statutes differ between states/provinces. There are overarching pieces of legislation that inform local legal and policy issues; the impact of these is briefly addressed. Various forms of documenting advance care plans, as well as their strengths and weaknesses, are discussed. Decision models are introduced as a means of guiding the clinician to provide quality care. Means of offering practical assistance to the client, such as motivational interviewing, the careful selection of appropriate educational material, and prevention of undue influence on the patient are discussed. Finally, the role of the allied health care professional in advocating for the client during the implementation is addressed. Understanding how the advance care plan should be implemented when a patient becomes incapable is essential when advocating for and protecting the rights of the patient. When a professional is prepared with the requisite understanding of all of the facets of advance care planning, he or she can become a strong ally for the patient and the family at this very important phase of life.

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.

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)0.002
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 score0.263
Threshold uncertainty score0.450

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.439
Teacher spread0.399 · 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