MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2277067792 · doi:10.1136/eb-2016-102333

Advance care planning in an acute care world

2016· editorial· en· W2277067792 on OpenAlexaff
Roberta Heale

Bibliographic record

VenueEvidence-Based Nursing · 2016
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

If you live in a developed country, you're most likely going to die of a chronic disease.1 ,2 Despite this, and despite programmes to promote quality ‘end of life’ care, the focus of healthcare systems remains steadfastly fixed on acute care and treatment.3–5 It's still not uncommon for patients to be asked about their wishes for end–of-life care as they are being admitted to hospital in crisis. These are decisions that could more easily be made soon after the diagnosis of a life-limiting condition, well before a crisis. Patients often receive diagnoses and therapeutic management in community practices where they know their healthcare providers and …

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.412
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.472
Teacher spread0.381 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvidence-Based NursingSame topicPalliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesFrench-language works237,207