Physician-Assisted Dying: A New Option In Canadian End of Life Care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Healthcare in Canada is undergoing a major transformation as patients obtain the right to request for and be granted physician-assisted dying (PAD).1 This legal reform represents a paradigm shift in Canada’s approach to end of life care. In February 2015, the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) struck down laws that made it illegal for individuals to assist others in ending their own lives. The ruling on PAD has been held in suspension for 16 months to allow for amendments to health policy.2 The SCC’s ruling only applies to competent adults with persistent, intolerable suffering, who consent to ending their lives.1 In this article, we aim to coalesce several opinions on the implementation of PAD, highlight the challenges, and critically evaluate recommendations of several policy-influencing bodies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.040 | 0.027 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.015 | 0.019 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".