MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2331986078 · doi:10.1161/str.46.suppl_1.wmp107

Abstract W MP107: Palliative Care Referrals are Under-used

2015· article· en· W2331986078 on OpenAlexaff
Renee Richetts, Katherine Afshar, Lynn Berger, Matthew Cantonis, Timothy J. Corbin, Jackie Guerrero, Lindsay Olson-Mack, Jean M Rockwell

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsBerger (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineStroke (engine)ReferralPalliative careContext (archaeology)Emergency medicineLife expectancyPhysical therapyPediatricsFamily medicinePopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: The National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) is a well-validated predictor of 90-day functional outcomes. A score of ≥16 forecasts a high probability of death or severe disability. The palliative care (PC) needs of patients with serious or life-threatening stroke are enormous. Per PC standards and the American Stroke Association’s position statement on PC after stroke, customized PC should be available to patients and their families throughout the entire course of illness. Palliative care can be initiated in the hospital setting without limitations on life expectancy. The purpose of this project was to quantify NIHSS scores on admission compared to the percent of PC referrals made at 3 urban hospitals that use neurological pre-formatted orders, and have in-patient PC programs. Hypothesis: We hypothesized that In-patient PC referrals for stroke patients with NIHSS scores of ≥16 are low, in the context of pre-formatted orders that set the referral trigger at ≥ to 25. Methodology: Ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke cases discharged from Nov. 1, 2013-May 31, 2014 were reviewed retrospectively (674 total). NIHSS assessments were scored by stroke-certified RN staff on admission. Excluded were patients whose full NIHSS score was not documented, patients referred directly to hospice, and patients who left Against Medical Advice. Cases were examined for NIHSS score, and whether or not they were referred to PC. Results: Of 615 qualifying patients, 51 (8.3%) were referred for PC during their in-patient stay. The percentage with a NIHSS score on admission </= 6, was 3.5% (11/313). At a score of 7-15, 7.8% (15/188) received referrals. At scores ≥ 16, 21.9% (25/114) were referred. Conclusion: While the poor 90-day outcomes for patients with NIHSS scores ≥ 16 have been well-validated, just under 22% of the patients in this study received in-patient referrals to palliative care. Previously conducted studies relating NIHSS scores and 90-day outcomes suggest that there is an opportunity to improve the quality of life for more of these patients and their families through increased palliative care referrals.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.336
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.121 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStroke→Same topicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues→French-language works237,207→