MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3016337139 · doi:10.1016/j.mehy.2020.109727

Hastened death due to disease burden and distress that has not received timely, quality palliative care is a medical error

2020· review· en· W3016337139 on OpenAlexaffabout
Romayne Gallagher, Michael J. Passmore, Caroline Baldwin

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Hypotheses · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaProvidence Health Care
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPalliative careDistressMedicineQuality of life (healthcare)HarmDiseaseHealth careCurative careMoodIntensive care medicineNursingPsychiatryFamily medicineMedical emergencyPsychologyAmbulatory careClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

All healthcare services strive to achieve the six factors of quality health care - safe, effective, patient-centered, timely, efficient and equitable. Yet multiple structural, process, policy and people factors can combine to result in medical error and patient harm. Measuring the quality of palliative care has many challenges due to its presence across multiple health sectors, variable skill and experience of providers and lack of defined processes for providing services. In Canada there is screening for symptoms and distress in most cancer centers, but not in non-cancer diseases. Screening for distress and disease burden can identify suffering, that when properly addressed, improves quality of life and reduces depression and hopelessness that can lead to requests for hastened death. Our hypothesis is that some requests for hastened death (known as Medical Assistance in Dying or MAiD in Canada) are driven by lack of access to palliative care or lack of quality in the palliative care attempting to address disease burden and distress such that the resulting provision of hastened death is a medical error. The root cause of the error is in the lack of quality palliative care in the previous weeks, months and years of the disease trajectory - a known therapy that the system fails to provide. The evidence for palliative care addressing symptoms and improving quality of life and mood as well as providing caregiver support is established. Early evidence supporting the use of psychotherapeutics in emotional and existential distress is also considered. We present three cases of request for assisted death that could be considered medical error. The paper references preliminary evidence from a review of previous access to palliative care in a limited number of MAiD cases showing that only a minority were identified as having palliative care needs prior to the admission where MAiD was provided. The evidence linking disease burden to hopelessness, depression and hastened death is provided. The many studies revealing the inequity or underservicing of the Canadian population with regards to palliative care are reviewed. We examine a recent framework for palliative care in Canada and point out the need for more aggressive use of standards, process and policies to ensure that Canadians are receiving quality palliative care and that it is equitably accessible to all.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.955
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.471
GPT teacher head0.501
Teacher spread0.030 · 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 designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations14
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical HypothesesSame topicPalliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesFrench-language works237,207