Chronically homeless persons’ participation in an advance directive intervention: A cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Chronically homeless individuals have high rates of hospitalization and death, and they may benefit from the completion of advance directives. AIM: To determine the rate of advance directive completion using a counselor-guided intervention, identify characteristics associated with advance directive completion, and describe end-of-life care preferences in a group of chronically homeless individuals. DESIGN: Participants completed a survey and were offered an opportunity to complete an advance directive with a trained counselor. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 205 residents of a shelter in Canada for homeless men (89.1% of those approached) participated from April to June 2013. RESULTS: Duration of homelessness was ⩾12 months in 72.8% of participants, and 103 participants (50.2%) chose to complete an advance directive. Socio-demographic characteristics, health status, and health care use were not associated with completion of an advance directive. Participants were more likely to complete an advance directive if they reported thinking about death on a daily basis, believed that thinking about their friends and family was important, or reported knowing their wishes for end-of-life care but not having told anyone about these wishes. Among individuals who completed an advance directive, 61.2% named a substitute decision maker, and 94.1% expressed a preference to receive cardiopulmonary resuscitation in the event of a cardiorespiratory arrest if there was a chance of returning to their current state of health. CONCLUSION: A counselor-guided intervention can achieve a high rate of advance directive completion among chronically homeless persons. Most participants expressed a preference to receive cardiopulmonary resuscitation in the event of a cardiorespiratory arrest.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".