MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2468289340 · doi:10.1177/082585971503100202

Impact of Palliative Care Consultations on Resource Utilization in the Final 48 to 72 Hours of Life at an Acute Care Hospital in Ontario, Canada

2015· article· en· W2468289340 on OpenAlexaffabout
Thomas Foreman, Mike Kekewich, Joshua T. Landry, Dorothyann Curran

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Palliative Care · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsOttawa Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPalliative careMedicineEmergency medicineEnd-of-life careFamily medicineRetrospective cohort studyHealth careNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A wealth of literature and economic analyses has shown that palliative care is associated with significant cost reductions compared to nonpalliative care. However, no one has assessed the impact of an inpatient palliative care consultation service on costs at the very end of life (48 to 72 hours before death). This retrospective cohort review of 100 inpatients at a large hospital in Ontario examines the effect of palliative care consultations on seven independent cost categories during this period: medical-imaging costs, physician costs, laboratory costs, pharmaceutical costs, other health professional costs, food services costs, and unit costs. Our study shows that patients who receive palliative care consultations are associated with significantly lower costs in the final 48 to 72 hours of life than their nonpalliative counterparts. Another significant finding was that the degree of cost reduction at the very end of life appears to be relative to how soon after the patient's admission the palliative care consultation was initiated.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.540
Threshold uncertainty score0.952

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.149
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.272 · 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

Citations8
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Palliative CareSame topicPalliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesFrench-language works237,207