Supportive Cardiology: Moving Palliative Care Upstream for Patients Living with Advanced Heart Failure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Heart failure (HF) affects ∼600,000 Canadians and is a chronic, life-limiting illness marked by exacerbations of distressing symptoms requiring acute medical management, typically sought in Canada's emergency departments. HF often has an unpredictable illness trajectory and is a chronic terminal illness with a poor prognosis. Patients living with advanced HF have difficulty in accessing palliative care (PC) supports, which can result in unnecessary suffering as their HF progresses and they near end of life (EOL). This is, in part, due to a lack of research, helping clinicians to identify patients who are approaching EOL. In addition, the unpredictable nature of illness progression often precludes access to most EOL resources in our current prognosis-dependent healthcare system. PC teams focus on optimizing quality of life through symptom management and ensure that care plans are congruent with patient and family preferences. A PC team was embedded into our institution's existing HF team. Findings show that integration of an embedded model of PC delivery for patients living with advanced HF led to overwhelming positive patient and family feedback while providing timely advance care planning discussions that may be associated with beneficial patient, family, and system outcomes. These outcomes can be used to inform public policy and speak to a cost-effective patient and family-centered approach for providing care to individuals and families living with advanced HF.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".