MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2169462595 · doi:10.1177/0009922810363610

A Guide for Health Care Practitioners in the Assessment of Young People’s Capacity to Consent to Treatment

2010· article· en· W2169462595 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Pediatrics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHealthcare Decision-Making and Restraints
Canadian institutionsOntario Tobacco Research UnitHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineContext (archaeology)Test (biology)Health careInformed consentPlan (archaeology)Alternative medicineFamily medicineNursingLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Health Care Consent Act, 1996, states that every person in Ontario, regardless of age, is presumed to be capable of consenting to or refusing medical treatment unless he or she is found incapable with respect to a specific treatment or plan of treatment. Health care practitioners may find it especially challenging to apply the legal test of capacity to young people. As an aid to assessment, a guide incorporating both legal and medical perspectives has been developed. This article describes the background and context of the development of the guide and explains how it helps practitioners to conduct a simpler, more focused evaluation of capacity in youth. The guide, along with an introduction and comments for parents, is included in an appendix.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.266
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
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 head0.163
GPT teacher head0.560
Teacher spread0.398 · 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