MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2321133683 · doi:10.1097/nhh.0000000000000105

Safety Issues at the End of Life in the Home Setting

2014· article· en· W2321133683 on OpenAlexaff
Susanna Edwards, Effie Galanis, Kay Mcgarvey, Catherine Prestwich, Sheila Ritcey, Karina Wulf

Bibliographic record

VenueHome Healthcare Nurse · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityCARE CanadaHome and Community Care Support ServicesToronto East General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)NursingEnd-of-life careEthnographyMedicineQualitative researchPsychologyGerontologyPalliative careSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Patients who choose care in a home setting at the end of life may be at risk because of their declining cognitive or physical abilities, environmental hazards in the home, or caregiving issues. Although safety concerns in hospitals have been well documented, knowledge about safety issues in the home setting is limited. This qualitative, focused-ethnographic study was conducted to understand the safety issues that occur in the home setting from the perspective of home care clinicians who manage these issues for end-of-life patients.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.209
Threshold uncertainty score0.359

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.339 · 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.

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

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHome Healthcare NurseSame topicPalliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesFrench-language works237,207