Voluntary Stopping of Eating and Drinking in Switzerland From Different Points of View: Protocol for a Mixed-Methods Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: "To die with dignity" has reached the significance of a core value in democratic societies. Based on this unconditional value, people require autonomy and care. "Voluntary stopping of eating and drinking" (VSED) represents an alternative to assisted suicide because no one else is involved in the action of death fastening, even though from outside, it might be considered as an extreme form of passive euthanasia. However, there are no data available about the prevalence and frequency of either explicit VSED or the implicit reduction of food and liquid in Switzerland. The responsible and independent ethics committee of the Greater Region of Eastern Switzerland (EKOS 17/083) approved this study. OBJECTIVE: The objectives of the study were to research the prevalence and frequency of different types (implicit and explicit) of VSED in Switzerland; to explore the experiences, attitudes, handling and recommendations made by palliative care experts; to develop a practical recommendation about VSED, which will be validated by experts in Delphi rounds. METHODS: This protocol describes a convergent mixed-method design to answer the research questions. In the first step, a cross-sectional trilingual survey (in German, French, and Italian) will be carried out to obtain a comprehensive representative picture of VSED in Switzerland. In the second step, qualitative research will be carried out by focus group interviews with palliative care experts. The interviews will be recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using generic coding, and embedded in an explorative descriptive qualitative approach. Based on the results of the first two steps, a practical recommendation will be developed. Experts will validate the practical recommendation in Delphi rounds. RESULTS: The enrolment was completed in summer of 2018. Data analysis is currently underway and the first results are expected to be submitted for publication in the end of 2019. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study will provide important information about the prevalence and frequency of VSED as well as the interpretation of palliative care experts about handling VSED in daily work. Furthermore, the practice recommendation will help professionals and institutions to improve the quality of care in patients and their relatives who made the decision to fasten death by VSED. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/10358.
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 | 0.085 | 0.049 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.059 | 0.014 |
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".