Bibliographic record
Abstract
Medical Assistance in Dying (MAID) is a legal federal framework for medical practitioners to assist in the cessation of life upon request from eligible patients who seek assisted death in order to die peacefully and with dignity. MAID’s ‘mentally competent’ eligibility criteria currently create confusion for social workers because they provide little guidance on how to best implement the desired practices intended to support the aims of MAID. Secondly, current criteria pose challenges for vulnerable populations, particularly patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). ALS patients who are deemed mentally incapable are denied access to MAID, suffering in pain every day until they die. Canada’s MAID policy infringes on their autonomy, and removes their choice to die with dignity. This injustice calls for further reconsideration of the ways MAID can be reformed to serve dying Canadians who are falling through the cracks of MAID. Policy recommendations include inclusion of advanced directives and substitute decision makers. Due to this unequal access in health care services, this concern constitutes a social work issue. Recommendations for social work include increasing competency, and advocacy regarding the provision of MAID.
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 | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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".