Implementation of Advance Directives Among Community-Dwelling Veterans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To evaluate the feasibility and effectiveness of implementing a "Let Me Decide" advance directive education program among veterans living in the community, the authors studied 150 veterans in south central Ontario. Thirty-four veterans had preexisting Powers of Attorney and were removed from the analysis, leaving a total sample of 116. Two methods of systematically implementing a directive program were evaluated after the intervention period and 6 months later. Eighty-two (71%) of the 116 veterans expressed interest in receiving detailed information about the program, and 67 (82%) of the 82 interested veterans were educated. Forty-two (63%) of the 67 educated veterans completed directives. Of the 116 interested veterans, 42 (36%) completed directives. Veterans who were educated about directives were surveyed at follow-up, and 37 of 38 (97%) respondents reported that the education process was beneficial and should be offered to other veterans. This response pattern was consistent among those who completed and those who did not complete directives.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".