The wish to die among palliative home care clients in Ontario, Canada: A cross-sectional study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In the pursuit to provide the highest quality of person centered palliative care, client preferences, needs, and wishes surrounding end of life should be used to inform the plan of care. During a clinical assessment for care services, clients may voluntarily express a 'wish to die' either directly to the clinician or it may be indirectly reported second-hand to the clinician through an informal caregiver or family member. This is the first study using data gathered from the interRAI Palliative Care Assessment instrument (interRAI PC) to examine socio-demographic, clinical, and psycho-social factors of palliative home care clients with the voluntary expression of a 'wish to die now'. Factors associated with the risk for depression within this group were also identified. Awareness and understanding of clients who express the 'wish to die' is needed to better tailor a person-centered approach to end-of-life care. METHODS: This cross-sectional study included assessment records gathered from 4,840 palliative home care clients collected as part of pilot implementation of the interRAI PC assessment instrument in Ontario, Canada from 2006 through 2011. RESULTS: During the clinical assessment, 308 palliative home care clients (6.7%) had voluntarily expressed a 'wish to die now'. Independent factors emerging from multivariate logistic regression analyses predicting the expression of a 'wish to die' included not being married/widowed, a shorter estimated prognosis, depressive symptoms, functional impairment, too much sleep (excessive amount), feeling completion regarding financial/legal matters, and struggling with the meaning of life. Among persons who expressed a 'wish to die now', those who exhibited depressive symptoms (23.8%, n = 64) were also more likely to exhibit cognitive impairment, have decline in cognition in the last 90 days, exhibit weight loss, have informal caregivers exhibiting distress, 'not have a consistent positive outlook on life' and report 'struggling with the meaning of life'. CONCLUSION: When clients voluntary express a wish to die clinicians should take notice and initiate follow-up to better understand the context of this meaning for the individual. Clients who expressed a 'wish to die' did not all experience pain, depression, and psychological distress suggesting an individualized approach to care management be taken.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".