Consensus statement of the International Summit on Intellectual Disability and Dementia related to end‐of‐life care in advanced dementia
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Adults with intellectual disability are affected by dementia at equivalent and elevated rates, many surviving into advanced age. End of life care and support considerations come into play among these individuals when most are in the advanced stage of dementia. METHODS: A preliminary report summarizing available literature and making initial recommendations was developed by a workgroup, reviewed by all conference participants and then was finalized by the workgroup. RESULTS: The International Summit on Intellectual Disability and Dementia produced a report on End of life care in advanced dementia that provides a synthesis statement which encompasses defining the state of advanced dementia, proposes use of palliative care services (including hospice) and recommends special efforts for enabling advanced directives and advance care planning prior to the extensive progression of dementia. The Summit further recommended that when aiding adults with advanced dementia, the following be undertaken: integrative efforts between intellectual disability and palliative care providers, specialized training for carers on end of life care and supports, and involvement of adults with intellectual disability early on in their advance care planning. CONCLUSIONS: The Consensus recommendations will ensure greater and more appropriate support at end of life for persons with intellectual disabilities and advanced dementia.
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.
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 | 0.004 | 0.051 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 it