MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2889035401 · doi:10.22605/rrh4500

Culturally safe end-of-life care for First Nations persons living on reserve

2018· article· en· W2889035401 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Brittney Russell, David Fred, Cary A. Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueRural and Remote Health · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersUniversity of AlbertaCancer Care Ontario
KeywordsEnd-of-life careQuality of life (healthcare)RehabilitationNursingHealth careMedicinePalliative carePsychologyGerontologyPolitical sciencePhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

End-of-life (EOL) care involves not just the final few days of a person's life but also living with a terminal illness over an extended period of time. Importantly, in addition to medical care and relief of physical suffering, it focuses on quality of life, honoring personal healthcare treatment decisions, supporting the family, and psychological, cultural and spiritual concerns for dying people and their families. The goal of this commentary is to raise rehabilitation therapists' awareness of the need for culturally safe EOL care services for First Nations persons who live on reserve and to identify strategies to help resolve this unmet need.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.912
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0130.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.315 · 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.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations6
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRural and Remote HealthSame topicIndigenous Health, Education, and RightsFrench-language works237,207