MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2132568655

Use of palliative care services in a semirural program in British Columbia.

2009· article· en· W2132568655 on OpenAlexaffabout
Diane Allan, Shelly Waskiewich, Kelli Stajduhar, Darcee Bidgood

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPalliative careUnit (ring theory)NursingMedicinePeninsulaGeographyPsychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Although specialized palliative care services in rural areas are scarce, many people who are dying, and their families, want to remain in their homes or within their own community. As such, semirural communities across Canada have developed a variety of initiatives to address this need. The purpose of our paper is to describe a semirural palliative care program located in British Columbia. METHODS: We used univariate and bivariate analyses to examine all patients for whom a palliative care bed was requested in the Saanich Peninsula Hospital Palliative Care Unit (PCU) between Jan. 1, 2005, and Dec. 31, 2006. RESULTS: Data suggest that there is provision of care for local residents in this semirural community. Throughout 2005 and 2006, SPH received a total of 411 requests for a palliative care bed with about three-quarters of admissions coming from other units within the hospital and from local residents. CONCLUSION: Use of services data collected from hospital charts can provide valuable information to help inform program and policy decision-makers. Yet such information is limited in relation to answering the question of whether the end-of-life needs of local residents are being met. Future studies should consider input from families and patients to enhance our understanding of the role of a PCU in a semirural environment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.102
Threshold uncertainty score0.205

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations4
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues→French-language works237,207→